[argyllcms] Re: Use of calibrated display to profile digital camera

On 2008 Jul 26, at 9:00 PM, Preben Soeberg wrote:
I was considering if Hexachrome (or similar) inkset could be used to make 
such a target.
The gamut of Hexachrome is about twice that of CMYK, but the inks has got a small quantity of fluorescent color added in order to maximize the gamut. 
Like CMYK, Hexachrome lacks gamut in the blue area.
Does somebody here know if it is feasible to use Hexachrome inkset (pigment 
or dye) for targets?
If so, then most inkjets should be even better. My Canon i9900 has eight inks (CMYK plus Red, Green, light cyan, and light magenta -- basically hexachrome plus light pigments to reduce visible dot patterns), and the high-end printers generally use twelve. The Canon LUCIA inkset is CMY + RGB + light C + light M + two different blacks + gray. The HP Vivera inkset is the same, but substitutes a gloss enhancer for the non-light C.
My concern with using a printer is similar to Graeme's concern with using a computer monitor. Sure, you can create a wide range of tristimulus values, but you might be using just a few spiky sources to do so. Ideally, you'd want your target to reflect every part of the spectrum so that a real-world object that reflects a very narrow portion of spectrum -- in a range that your printer's inks reflect nothing -- will be accurately accounted for by the profile.
I don't know if printer inks are ``good enough'' for the task -- I suspect not, or else GMB wouldn't get away with charging $300 for their targets. But, if they are...well, I'd be all over that. I'll print me up a 13x19 matte-finish target with three times as many patches as the GMB one, all for the cost of a sheet of paper and a few drops of bulk ink.
But I suspect I'll instead be just printing some of the patches on the inkjet and filling in the remaining patches with pastels or whatever. 

Cheers,

b&

Other related posts: