[argyllcms] R: Re: Neutralize Grey Axis
- From: "realman10@xxxxxxxxx" <realman10@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:29:28 +0100 (CET)
Hi all,
As the OP of this thread I'd like to say thank you to all those who are
contributing. It was my first post here and the response is fantastic.
Back to our issue, my theoretical knowledge is somewhat limited and I was
wondering what are the practical suggestions that I can gather so far.
Nykolay has used this command line:
colprof -iD50_1.0.sp -o1931_2 -f -qh -ds:n -dw:.345669:.358496 -da:100 -db:18 -
dl:170 -df:1.5 -df:.345669:.358496 -S"sRGB.icm"
is that something I can use as such or does it need to be adapted to the
actual paper white and L that he is using?
Thanks
Michele
>----Messaggio originale----
>Da: nikolay_po@xxxxxxx
>Data: 10/01/2011 22.04
>A: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Ogg: [argyllcms] Re: Neutralize Grey Axis
>
>I've just sent new profile to end user. I hope he'll test it.
>The parameters was:
>
>colprof -iD50_1.0.sp -o1931_2 -f -qh -ds:n -dw:.345669:.358496 -da:100 -db:18
-dl:170 -df:1.5 -df:.345669:.358496 -S"sRGB.icm"
>
>The result is closer to the user demand, than the -dpp was.
>
>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:43:09 +0100 письмо от Klaus Karcher <lists@digitalproof.
info>:
>
>> "Gerhard F?rnkranz" wrote:
>> > As the maths for relative colorimetric intent are well defined by
>> > the ICC specs, it makes sense that this "artisitic freedom" applies
>> > only to perceptual intent.
>>
>> Of course. And exactly this led me to the suspicion that it might be
>> rather a FWA compensation issue (assuming Nikolay's client compared PM
>> and Argyll relative results and found only the Argyll version too
>> bluish). But maybe he compared Argyll relative with PM "percolute".
>>
>> Nikolay Pokhilchenko wrote:
>> > I have two troubles with users of "blue" cheap photopapers. The
>> > profiles from Profile Maker works much better for them. The relative
>> > intent in ArgyllCMS profile was unacceptable on bluish papers.
>>
>> ... so the question whether the problem originates from wrong FWA
>> assumptions or wrong adaptation assumptions is unanswered.
>>
>> Furthermore it would be good to know if both profiles have been made
>> from the same measurement file (in order to rule out measurement errors).
>>
>> Klaus
>
>
>
Other related posts:
