[argyllcms] Re: Rendering Intents

  • From: Stalis Man <stalis_man@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 15:17:31 +0000

Hi Krzysztof,
 
I am indeed doing cmy separations internally.   Maybe madness but that's just 
how it is.
 
Best Regards
 
Stali
 
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Rendering Intents
From: k2mil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 15:50:08 +0200
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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.                                       

Other related posts: