[argyllcms] Re: Rendering Intents

  • From: Krzysztof Tomczyk <k2mil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 15:50:08 +0200

Hi
So this is not the case which I experienced, but what I think is worth to 
consider is that some printers receive RGB only and internally do cmy(k) 
separations. I hope this is not yours case.
Best regards

On 7 kwietnia 2014 08:44:36 CEST, Stalis Man <stalis_man@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Hi Kryzysztof,
> 
>I am writing a little tool to take CMY encoded Tiff files and convert
>them to a file that I can send direct to the printer via USB bypassing
>its usual driver.
> 
>So I have no RGB in my work flow.
> 
>Best Regards
> 
>Stali
> 
>
> 
>Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Rendering Intents
>From: k2mil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 13:11:31 +0200
>To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>IMHO you have a RGB printer. I experienced the same symptoms in the
>past.
>
>Best regards
>
>Krzysztof
>
>On 4 kwietnia 2014 11:47:10 CEST, Stalis Man <stalis_man@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 
>> Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 16:28:15 +1100
>> From: graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Rendering Intents
>> 
>> Stalis Man wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> > collink -v -qh -i s -g srgb.icc cmy190214_SP.icm
>sRGBcmy190214_s.icm
>> > for a saturated intent.
>> 
>> > I am profiling  a printer with just C, M and Y hence I
>> > made the cmy190214_SP.icm profile without any K at all with:
>> 
>> > colprof -v -qh -kz -l300 -iD50 -nP -nS -S srgb.icc cmy090114.
>> 
>> So the printer is defined to be CMY space ? If so, the -kz doesn't
>> apply - there is no K ink.
>> 
>> Or do you mean that you have profiled it as a CMYK printer ?
>> If so, -kz is not guaranteed to give you zero K ink, it just gives
>> you the minimum possible that achieves the ta
> rget
>colors.
>> 
>> > I printed of the standard colour checker card I was
>> > surprised that the perceptual intent looked rather 'smokey'
>compared to the
>> > Saturated intent whilst the Relative looked too brown compared to
>the Absolute.
>> 
>> It's not possible to comment without knowing the source of the image
>file,
>> the workflow used to print it, or be able to see the result.
>> 
>> > As a result folks seem to prefer the saturated intent whilst
>> > I had expected the Perceptual to be the one they would want.  Their
>choice is
>> > down to the  general darkening of the perceptual.
>> 
>> Naturally people prefer "pop" if they see it in isolation and want
>impact.
>> "pop" is not accuracy though.
>> 
>> > Is the perceptual being smokey/ darkened to be expected or
>> > have I dropped an obvious clanger.
>> 
>> Check what
>  you
>mean by CMY. To profile in CMY you need to create a CMY
>> chart and print with just CMY.
>> 
>> Graeme Gill.
>> 
>>  Thanks for your response Graeme.  I'll clarify.   I am profiling a
>CMY printer and I did create and measure a CMY chart.   I used the -kz
>because I wasn't sure how things worked internally, I'll retry without
>it.  It's CMY because I am using dyefilm which doesn't support K.
>Regarding the 'smokiness' it is a very subjective term to use.  What I
>was trying to explain was that having created a device link with a
>perceptual intent and another with an absolute intent that the Yellows
>looked quite different although within gamut. Absolute was fine whilst
>Perceptual looked as if I were looking through a dirty window. Maybe I
>am expecting too much?  I understand that perceptual is supposed to be
>more pleasing to photographers but this f
> rom a
>large gamut to a smaller gamut is decidedly not.  I'll look at the D65
>/ D50 missmatch. Best Regards Stali 
>             
>
>
>-- 
>
>Wysłane za pomocą K-9 Mail.                                      

-- 
Wysłane za pomocą K-9 Mail.

Other related posts: