[argyllcms] Re: Argyll vs. manufacturer's profile
- From: Uli Oertel <uli.oertel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:09:32 +0200
Am 20.10.2010 11:30, schrieb Graeme Gill:
BTW, with respect to gamut mapping in colprof: As I understood, the
source profile is relevant for the proof display but a different one
does not influence the print? Is it correct? I used AdobeRGB1998 since
it is my PS working space and my monitors gamut is near to it (95 %).
The source profile will affect the gamut mapping, therefore it will
affect the color reproduction of perceptual and saturation.
Did you in fact use either perceptual or saturation intent when
you printed using the profile ? If so, how does the relative
colorimetric intent compare between the old and new profile ?
Hi,
I used perceptual (nearly always I use perceptual). In PS proof view I
compared the old R2400 and the new R3880 profiles with perceptual RI:
The R3880 profile seems to be more saturated but the R2400 profile led
to cleaner blues.
With relative colorimetric the blues seem to be cleaner, too.
It's hard to describe. I attach the 3 profiles:
R2400 Argyll 1.2.1: E_PrGlossy_OptPh.icm (Source profil was
AdobeRGB1998, too)
R3880 Argyll 1.3.0: R3880 Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper.icm
R3880 Epson: Epson Stylus Pro 3880_3885_3890 PremiumGlossyPhotoPaper.icc
[There have been quite a lot of change over the last two years in
regard to gamut mapping.]
What you would suggest as source profile? Since I think about changing
my working space from AdobeRGB1998 to ProPhoto (gamut view shows that
the printer gamut exceeds AdobeRGB1998) I tried ProPhoto as source
gamut, too. And this led to the questions causing this experiment here...
Graeme Gill.
Thanks in advance
Uli
Other related posts:
