Florian said: >Unlike the colorimetric B2A table which usually clips if BPC is not used >(note that xicclu has no notion of BPC), the perceptual B2A table maps the >lightness axis, i.e. an input L* of 5 will not result in an output >L* of 5, and so the two xicclu results are not really comparable. If you >want to compare the xicclu colorimetric to perceptual results, you'd need >to at least offset & scale the input L* values by the black point for >(only!) the colorimetric xicclu lookup. Hi Florian, Thanks for the info. I can't say I understand what you're saying here. It would seem to me that how the perceptual mapping is done depends on the author (Graeme in other words). What I observe is that when I soft-proof an image with relative mapping and then toggle to perceptual that the whole image becomes much lighter, as though a Levels or Curves adjustment, boosting the mid-tones and whites, had been applied. If I do the same thing with a profile made by i1Profiler, this doesn't happen. Here is an example (but unfortunately it's extremely difficult to show this in a static way ... it's much easier if you pick an image and then toggle the soft-proof between relative and perceptual yourself. You can have simulate black ink on or off, the same effect will be seen (at least if your profile has been made with a larger source gamut like Beta RGB)). http://www.irelandupclose.com/customer/argyll/relcol-example.jpg http://www.irelandupclose.com/customer/argyll/relcol-example-mono.jpg As it's not possible to use BPC with xicclu it makes the test with xicclu a bit meaningless as I would certainly always have BPC on. Robert