[argyllcms] Re: Reprofiling
- From: Joe Tschudi <tresorjoe@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 11:12:41 +0100
Hello,
Using the calibration approach compensates for linearity and density changes
only, say printhead irregularities, etc. But when a paper white or ink lot
changes, then the per-channel calibration won't help a lot. I've seen and tried
some solutions in the market (for money) that can do re-profiling on ICC basis
to compensate for slight color changes in the complete printing process.
I tested argyll's "refine" but that seems to apply to specific colors in a
profile only, not to a global compensation process.
@Dimitrije: Probably the best and easiest to compensate for your color shifts
would simply to profile the printer again.
Regards,
Joe
Am 03.03.2013 um 10:08 schrieb Dimitrije Zivkovic <migraf.keramika@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Printer doesn't have stably density in 100%, so recalibration does not give
> the same results, which should be for valid profile.
>
> For example, colored pictures looks good in 90% but gray pictures are not,
> because I have to print in color mode and after recalibration gray tones are
> shifted to some color (most of the time to yellow or blue)
>
> Profile is made with command:
>
> colprof -v -qh -bh -kp 0 0.3 .95 .8 .8 -Zp -Tp -tp -SAdobeRGB1998.icc -l260
>
> and later applycal.
>
> Maybe I go wrong somewhere.
>
>
> Dimitrije
>
> On Mar 3, 2013, at 2:18 AM, Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Dimitrije Zivkovic wrote:
>>> Thanks for advice, but I already tried workflow with calibration.
>>> But problem is density, what is probably not possible to solve with profile.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean.
>>
>> Typically if calibration is being used to avoid frequent re-profiling,
>> the maximum density for each channel will be chosen to be slightly less
>> than 100%, allowing room for calibration to compensate for a drop in density.
>>
>> Graeme Gill.
>
Other related posts:
