Yves,
Do yourself a favor to "analyze" the paper measurements.
Look at the ti3 file "numbers".
Or, at least, print a grayscale that goes from 255,255,255 to 0,0,0 in 10
increments, let's say, on your paper and measure each printed patch, to see
what kind of Lightness value (L*) you get? A good, coated paper will give
you L* < 15. Newsprint paper is usually no lower than 28 to 30.
What value are you getting on your print for the darkest black?
/ Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf Of Yves Gauvreau
Sent: December 15, 2019 7:38 AM
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Can we control the shadows (was black point
compensation)
Roger,
I'm sure the way I said this is likely not the best way.
I understand there is a physical limit to how "black" we can get from this
or that paper, inks and printer combination. The same goes for the whitest
value we can get, these are physicals limitations.
If you compare the 2 region on the bottom of this image as seen on screen
with a print of this same image on most paper, at least all the ones I used
with very few exception.
(http://www.jirvana.com/printer_tests/PrinterEvaluationImage_V002.zip)
The highlights squares of value 254 to 243 on a white (255) background
always print such that they appear very similar to what's on screen.
With my old eyes, except for the patch 254 I can always see from 253 to
243 easily just as on screen.
On the other side, the black patches on a black (0) background what I can
see on the print is very dependent on the paper I used. On a photo rag satin
paper by Hahnemuehle which uses my printer matte black ink, I get basically
what I see on my screen, again with my old eyes I can see down to patch
number 6. With some other paper I can see a difference only from patch
number 18.
My question, is there a way to create a profile that would better "render"
the deep shadows of this image so most if not all papers look more like
what's on my screen. Just in case it helps this especially for non glossy
paper for which I don't care much even if they are in general better at this
deep shadow stuff.
Is it a question of increasing the number of patches in the deep shadows?
Is it a question of the quality of the measures?
Any suggestion?
Thanks,
Yves
On 12/13/2019 6:20 PM, graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Doesn't it "depend" on the paper, Yves?
Some papers "absorb" more than others?
And even though the printer adds more ink, it is only "absorbed"?
And you don't extra "Extra L*" for it? (L* does not go down?)
/ Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Yves Gauvreau
Sent: December 13, 2019 6:17 PM
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] black point compensation
Hi,
I'm trying to choose some fine art papers. I always print de same
image I got from here
(http://www.jirvana.com/printer_tests/PrinterEvaluationImage_V002.zip)
so I can compare apple with apple hopefully.
Many fine art papers have a black point of around L* 16 but with some
I can see many squares in the bottom left, with one I have, I can see
down to square 6 while other with a similar black point value if not
identical, I can only see down to square 16-18.
It's all over the place basically, so my question is, can we can do
something about that? On most if not all my prints with this image I
can see up to square 253 almost all the time. Would be nice to have
similar on the dark side.
Thanks,
Yves
