Hello Graeme,
I have streamlined my script to make it easier for analysis. I have also
uploaded all the input and output files as well as the log files to my Adobe
"fog" for retrieval: https://adobe.ly/2uYFMge
Input:
=====
E171004.cxf
Targetscan_1.tif
Targetscan_2.tif
Targetscan_3.tif
What worries me is the last line of the output from profcheck:
--> Profile check complete, errors (CIE94): max. = 69.509693, avg. =
21.758189, RMS = 25.497098
The error reported for the extended target set is a factor of 17 (!) larger
than the error usually reported for a standard IT8-target.
E.g. for my Ektachrome-target I get
--> Profile check complete, errors (CIE94): max. = 4.108253, avg. =
1.286884, RMS = 1.515632
I would very much appreciate any advice on this result.
Best wishes
Hermann-Josef
These are the commands executed:
cxf2ti3 E171004.cxf E171004
scanin -v -dipna Targetscan_1.tif
D:\Software\Bilder\Argyll\Argyll_V2.1.1\ref\ISO12641_2_3_1.cht E171004.cie
Taregtscan_1_diagnostic.tif >scanin_1.log
scanin -v -dipna Targetscan_2.tif
D:\Software\Bilder\Argyll\Argyll_V2.1.1\ref\ISO12641_2_3_2.cht E171004.cie
Targetscan_2_diagnostic.tif >scanin_2.log
scanin -v -dipna Targetscan_3.tif
D:\Software\Bilder\Argyll\Argyll_V2.1.1\ref\ISO12641_2_3_3.cht E171004.cie
Targetscan_3_diagnostic.tif >scanin_3.log
average -m Targetscan_1.ti3 Targetscan_2.ti3 Targetscan_3.ti3
Fuji_Provia_LSI171004_g22.ti3
colprof -v -A reflecta -M DigitDia6000 -D
"ext_IT8_Fuji_Provia_LSI171004_g22_p_h_s" -C "Hermann-Josef Roeser" -Z t -Zp
-qh -bn -as Fuji_Provia_LSI171004_g22 >colprof.log
profcheck -v2 -c -w -x -m -e -h -P 3.00 Fuji_Provia_LSI171004_g22.ti3
Fuji_Provia_LSI171004_g22.icm >profcheck.log
--- Begin Message ---Hermann-Josef Röser wrote:
- From: "Graeme Gill" <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 04:16:22 +0200
Hi,
Using the very same parameters (I think ?) as for a
conventional IT8-target, I get deltaEs on the order of several 10s. So
something is going awfully wrong here.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. 10 delta E comparing what to what ?
- i.e. do you have some golden standard you are comparing to, or are
you just reporting profile self fit errors ? If the latter, what
other chart self fit errors are you comparing this to ?
- it's not unusual to have worst case self fit errors for scanners of 10
delta E,
due to the (often) non standard observer spectral response of input devices.
I create a DOS batch with an EXCEL macro, so I can compare the two runsI
(extended and standard) easily. I append the batches below. Any hint, what
am doing wrong here with the extended target ISO 12641-2, is highlywelcome!
The best way to allow others to help in resolving processing issues is to
make
files available and provide a concise set of "repeat by" instructions, so
that
the workflow and problem can be reproduced.
Cheers,
Graeme Gill.
--- End Message ---
