[argyllcms] Re: RGB Printer Profiling / Issues with Blacks and Shadows
- From: Phil Cruse <pcruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 17:16:25 +0100
Hi Andreas,
Alan has mentioned CS5 not allowing No Color Management. You could be up
against the well-known ColorSync bug where a profile is always applied to RGB
files by ColorSync, NOT only in 10.6, making it impossible to print (RGB)
profiling charts. There are two workarounds:
1) Download the Adobe Color Printing Utility, which only works in OS X 10.6, or
Windows.
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/834/cpsid_83497.html
Print your charts with this. You don't need Photoshop running.
2)If that doesn't work, try the Eric Chan method:
Open the image in PS, then Assign Adobe RGB. Print with PS using Photoshop
Color Management, and Adobe RGB as your printer profile, and Relative, but NO
BPC.
Good Luck
Phil Cruse
Graphic Quality Consultancy
14 White Hill Court, Berkhamsted, Herts., HP4 2PS.
http://www.colourphil.co.uk
On 1 Aug 2011, at 16:15, Alan Goldhammer wrote:
> This is a tough one. I know the Enhanced Matte Paper is loaded with Optical
> Brightening Agents, but I'm not sure that would explain why the washed out
> blacks. I have also never seen bad shadows as you show in the test strips.
> I am not familiar with Aperture so I cannot judge whether there is some
> difficulty in printing out targets in the same way there is with Photoshop
> CS5 (you cannot turn off color management in CS5 and must use the Adobe
> Color Print Utility to print out targets). I've profiled four matte papers
> that I commonly use and the profiles have turned out fine. I've double
> checked by printing out the same test image that you are using. For matte
> papers I can detect a difference in the 6 & 8 but not below 6 (which is
> probably to be expected because of the smaller gamut for matte papers). I
> generally get a Dmax of 1.6 for matte papers with no OBAs and a touch higher
> for Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Ultra Smooth which does have some.
>
> It might be useful for you to post the exact settings that you used in the
> Argyll workflow to make sure that there was not an inadvertent error (which
> believe me is pretty easy to have happen).
>
> Alan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Andreas Hebeisen
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 7:29 AM
> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [argyllcms] RGB Printer Profiling / Issues with Blacks and Shadows
>
>
> Hello there.
>
> On my quest to find a affordable solution which lets me use my
> 1ipro-Instrument also with OS X Lion, i've stumbled upon ArgyllCms.
> Which will hopefully also be supported on OS X Lion some time in the future;
> something Xrite obviously isn't willing/able to do for my existing software
> Eye-One Match 3. At least not for an reasonable amount of money.
>
> Ironically, I'm facing the same problems which I already had to deal with
> when I started working with Eye-One Match 3 some years back.
> Luckily, i found this article
> http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/i1GamutMapping/index.html
> which unveiled a hidden feature within the software allowing me to get the
> results I intended.
>
>
> First some details about my working environment:
>
> OS: Apple Mac OS X Snow Leopard (10.6.8)
> Instrument: Gretag/Xrite eye-one-Pro, Rev. D
> Printer: Epson Stylus Pro 3800
> Paper/Media type: Epson Enhanced Matte Paper Color Matching Settings in
> printer driver while printing test charts: Epson Color controls Color
> Settings in Epson printer driver while printing test charts: Off (No Color
> Adjustment)
> ArgyllCMS: latest version, 1.3.3
>
> For all my testing I use the A4 printer evaluation image from Uwe
> Steinmüllers site.
> It can be downloaded here (scroll down to the bottom of the page):
> http://www.outbackprint.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.html
> My version is converted to my working color space, which is ProPhotoRGB, but
> besides that, i didn't change anything in the file. I'm doing all the soft
> proofing and printing from Apple Aperture, using the profiles generated with
> Eye-One Match and ArgyllCms. Aperture offers the render intents Perceptual
> and Relative Colorimetric, with and without Black Point Compensation.
>
>
> For creating my very first ArgyllCms profiles, I used the steps described in
> this post:
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=53408.msg436392#msg4
> 36392
> Except that I went with the ProPhotoRGB source profile instead of AdobeRGB.
> Since the author of this post created a profile for the Hahnemuehle Bamboo
> paper, which I also use from time to time, I figured this would be a good
> starting point.
> Except that I'm using Epson Enhanced Matte paper at the moment. Mainly for
> going easy on the budget while tampering with a new software and cranking
> out tons of test prints. ;)
>
>
> And finally the problem:
>
> When I print the evaluation image mentioned above, I don't get the blacks
> and shadow details I'm looking for on this matte paper. The problem already
> shows up in the softproof view of Aperture and remains when the (matte
> black) ink hits the paper.
> In the attached image, I've tried to visualize the problem. It contains a
> crop from the bottom left corner of the evaluation image with different
> profiles and render intent settings.
>
>
> Image explanations and comments from top to bottom:
>
> 1) Profile created with Eye-One Match 3, set to "NewGamutMapping L0.3" using
> the trick in the article I've mentioned at the beginning.
> The render intent was set to "Perceptual" which always seemed to give me the
> results I've wanted in the past years using profiles created this way.
>
> Blacks: With this profile/setting combination the maximum possible Dmax with
> the used ink/paper combination can be reached.
> A crucial criteria, as everyone printing on matte Fine Art Papers probably
> figured out.
>
> Shadow separation: pretty good; on a printed sample, I'am able to
> distinguish between patch no. 10 from the surrounding black with ease.
>
>
> 2) Profile created with ArgyllCMS. Render intent: Perceptual.
>
> Blacks: lousy, as one can see in the image, the black is more of a very dark
> grey, than really black.
> I didn't bother measuring the Dmax since this is obviously pretty far away
> from what this print/ink/paper combination is able to deliver.
>
> Shadow separation: slightly better than with 1) but with black being dark
> grey not really a surprise.
>
>
> 3) Profile created with ArgyllCMS. Render intent: Relative Colorimetric,
> Black Point Compensation ON
>
> Blacks: as lousy as with 2), on paper even worse I didn't bother measuring
> the Dmax since this is obviously pretty far away from what this
> print/ink/paper combination is usually able to deliver.
>
> Shadow separation: slightly worse than with 2)
>
>
> 4) Profile created with ArgyllCMS. Render intent: Relative Colorimetric,
> Black Point Compensation OFF
>
> Blacks: great, that's the way I like it. But only on paper, in the soft
> proof view, I see little difference while turning BPC on and off.
>
> Shadow separation: not really existent, on paper, even patch no. 24 isn't
> really separated from the surrounding black!
>
>
> Besides those findings, I have to mention, that everything else is as
> expected.
> Good color match to (eye-One Match calibrated) screens, nice saturation etc.
> For my eyes, the color looks best with Relative Colorimetric and BPC turned
> off.
> But this has also to do with the darker blacks and therefore more contrast
> in the print.
>
> A little side note: When I use Apples Color Sync Utility to compare the two
> profiles mentioned here, the ArgyllCMS profile never reaches the bottom of
> the given space, as the eye-One profile does. Seems there is a connection
> between what i'm struggling with and what ColorSync shows. Or ist this just
> coincidence? Am I confusing two different things here?
>
> Whatever.
> At the moment i'm _really_ looking for deep, really dark blacks the way I
> get them with sample 4) but with the shadow details on a level close (or
> even better) to the ones in 1).
> I've played around for hours with different settings, searching the
> internet, performing all kinds of CMS voodoo rituals I'm aware of; but non
> luck.
> Still stuck to "not-really-black" blacks and lousy shadow separation.
>
> Any help out there?
> Someone else must have seen this before or am I going mad?
> Thanks for _any_ help in advance!
>
> Cheers
> Andreas Hebeisen
>
>
>
> P.S. For those who want to analyze my issue, you can download the ti3-File
> and the created ICC-Profile from this URL:
> http://home.ggaweb.ch/files/mail/2011/2011-08-01_profiles.zip
> I've also included the mentioned ICC-Profile I created with Eye-One Match 3
> for the same printer/paper/ink combination.
>
> The attached images are also downloadable from there in the original
> resolution:
>
> http://home.ggaweb.ch/files/mail/2011/Profile-Comparisons-by-Print+Softproof
> -Preview-in-Aperture.jpg
> http://home.ggaweb.ch/files/mail/2011/ColorSync_Profile_Comparison.jpg
>
>
>
>
Phil Cruse
Graphic Quality Consultancy
14 White Hill Court, Berkhamsted, Herts., HP4 2PS.
http://www.colourphil.co.uk
Other related posts:
