Alastair M. Robinson wrote:
That's very interesting.
Did you photograph the IT8 target and build a profile for the camera, or "trust" the camera's sRGB space?
If the former, did you have the IT8 target and Argyll target in the same shot?
I'm told that using Vuescan can help to avoid the clipping problem (due to better exposure control), which in turn helps minimise the colour cast.
The colourmouse, AFAICT has a fairly simple light sensor (possibly even monochrome), and cycles between several different coloured LEDs. Using the amount of light reflected from the patch for each colour, the driver software figures out an XYZ value for the measured patch.
The peak and average error merely tell you well Argyll's generated tables fit the original data in the .ti3 file. With the colourmouse, and targets of 120 - 150 patches, I seem to get a peak error of about 1.3, and average of 0.8.
The values I get when doing "profile" on the IT8 are: Snapscan1212: peak err = 7.703943, avg err = 0.807319 DX6440: peak err = 8.134495, avg err = 1.193943
When profiling the printer: Snapscan1212: peak err = 12.337768, avg err = 1.783332 DX6440: peak err = 10.115366, avg err = 1.772115