[argyllcms] Re: Print Validation
- From: <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 17:09:31 +0100
OK, thanks Graeme,
I've got it now.
I have to say that there doesn't appear to be too many scenarios to do with
colour management you haven't thought through (and implemented). Really
impressed!
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Graeme Gill
Sent: 15 October 2014 14:26
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Print Validation
robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I've tried your first method and it's just fine. I'll try the variation:
is
> that effectively equivalent to using profcheck?
Yes, it's going to be similar.
> I don't really understand your last suggestion.
In a proofing type workflow, the aim is to get a printer (or other
display device) to emulate some particular target colorspace. You do
this by transforming the colors you want to reproduce through a source
profile (which defines the target you are trying to emulate) and the
device profile.
If you want to check how accurate your proofing system is,
then the type of thing you might do is generate a test
set in the target device colorspace, and run it through the
source profile with fakeread to create the reference .ti3 file.
Then you run the same colors through your proofing workflow
(e.g. create a .tif using printtarg, then apply the source
to printer device link to the .tiff using cctiff and print it,
or run the .tif through whatever ICC based workflow you have
setup for proofing), measure the result and compare
the .ti3 to the reference using colverify.
Graeme Gill.
Other related posts:
