Hi Alan, Thanx for your quick reply. My existing profiles are made with Argyll so it should be v2 Number of patches - well I did profiles with under 1k and 2,5k patches and, I maybe imagine that, but I think later are a notch better to my eyes. If no one come up with better advice I might play with CM and QTR as advised here: northlight-images co uk / article_pages / bw_printing / bw_print_colormunki html Instead of playing with preliminary profiles but for now colour prints are a bit more important to me than B&W. I haven't done any extensive tests or a lot of prints using Epson ABW - I might try that as well, before playing with QTR to see if there is any change for better. Any other views more than welcome;] Many thanx, Tom -- t.danus@xxxxxxxxx Skype: Ithilstone On 20 May 2011 17:51, Alan Goldhammer <agoldhammer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think you need to ask the question whether your existing profiles are > deficient and if so in which color regions. First you need to check whether > any of the existing Epson profiles you have are version 2 or 4 profiles. I > don't believe version 4 profiles will work with Argyll (I know that my > ColorMunki software creates Version 4 profiles as a default and they are not > read by Argyll). Personally I think you are using too many patches for > creating Epson 3880 profiles. I used 980 patches with my ColorMunki and got > very fine profiles as judged by a visual test print (I have an i1 spectro on > order to refine these profiles). One other point in the p/s, you will get > better results in B&W printing if you use the Epson ABW print driver. It > gives you a deeper black and better (but not perfect) linearity. There are > ways to profile the ABW print driver for improved linearity using QTR or > having a custom profile made. At this point I don't believe Argyll supports > creation of this type of profile though I would like to see one given the > amount of B&W printing that I do. > > > > cheers, > > > > Alan > >