[argyllcms] Re: Soft-proofing in Photoshop with Argyll - correction to my last post!

  • From: <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 20:23:13 +0100

Hi Roger,

 

I'm not sure about the success!  I'm still trying to get this right, and the
reason for my post was to ask whether or not I'm doing the soft-proofing
correctly.  At the moment I have an issue with the FWA compensation which
doesn't seem to work (I have another post about this).

 

But at any rate, the soft-proofing certainly looks pretty good (especially
on papers with no FWA), whether or not I have the technical side right
(hopefully you or Graeme or someone can set my mind at ease :-)).

 

Regarding the SoLux lamp.  I don't have your issue because I'm only viewing
an area of around 16"x12" (because I want the print to be the same size as
the soft-proof . as I think that if it is larger or smaller it will affect
how it looks).  So I have the lamp about 1m away, directed downwards, with
'blinkers' on it to focus the beam onto the print.  You can see my (very
experimental!) setup here:
http:www.irelandupclose.com/customer/softproofing.

 

To view large prints I think you would need to use multiple lights arranged
in a square, perhaps, with a diffuser in front to get as constant an
illumination as possible.  Of course there's bound to be some variation
between the lamps. On the positive side, you wouldn't be viewing the print
side-by-side with the monitor in this case, so containing the light wouldn't
be a problem.

 

I'm really trying hard to get this right (and it isn't easy as there's the
paper, the light, the ink, the monitor, the profiles, Photoshop, Argyll,
ColorNavigator .. enough to give anyone a headache :-)), so any and all
advice would be highly welcome!!

 

Robert

 

  _____  

From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Roger Breton
Sent: 03 June 2014 17:15
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Soft-proofing in Photoshop with Argyll - correction
to my last post!

 

Hi Robert,

 

One quick question, about your success with the Solux lamp. 

I have been a faithful user of the 4700K lamp for years.

But I have never achieve a uniform beam?

In my humble experience, the lamp has to be placed quite a distance from the
viewing area to form a reasonably wide uniform lighting area, something like
one meter is not far-fetched. As you know, the fall-off is very rapid,
quickly shift down to 3000K in a span for a few inches from the center beam.
And the new generation of "coated" inside bulb has not alleviate the problem
of beam uniformity for me.

BTW, thank you for the detailed account of your information. Makes tracing
your logic a breeze.

 

Best / Roger Breton

 

From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 1 juin 2014 18:55
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Soft-proofing in Photoshop with Argyll - correction to
my last post!

 

Hi,

 

I'm trying to set up a good soft-proofing workflow using Argyll and I would
really appreciate a bit of help!

 

To start off with, my work area is set up as follows:

-       Monitor: good quality wide gamut (Eizo CG277), calibrated and
profiled to Native, 6500K, 80cd/m2, Gamma 2.2 (default values for the
CG277). 

-       Profiling: i1Pro2 / i1D3 / CG277-built-in-colorimeter. Eizo
ColorNavigator is used for the monitor (hardware) calibration and profiling
(i1Pro2 as reference).

-       A 4700K SoLux lamp (which actually has a temperature of around 4200K
according to Argyll/i1Pro2) for viewing the image. I adjust the luminance by
moving the lamp forward or backward. The lamps have a good SPD with low UV. 

 

What I'm doing for soft-proofing (and as I'm a novice at colour management
and Argyll, I have no doubt I'm doing things wrong) is as follows:

 

-       I run illumread -S -c1 -H PROFILENAME.sp

-       I create two profiles as follows:

o       colprof -v -A"HP" -M"Z3100" -iPROFILENAME.sp -DPROFILENAME -qh
-SMONITORPROFILENAME.icc -cmd -dpe -OPROFILENAME.icc i1Chart

o       colprof -v -A"HP" -M"Z3100" -DPROFILENAME -qh
-SMONITORPROFILENAME.icc -cmd -dpe -OPROFILENAME_NoSP.icc i1Chart

-       I print using the PROFILENAME_NoSP.icc profile

-       I soft-proof using the PROFILENAME.icc with Simulate Paper White on.

 

This seems to work really well and the monitor and print match very closely.
HOWEVER . I have no idea if this works just by luck and so can't be relied
on, or if it's technically correct.  Softproofing with PROFILENAME.icc gives
the right paper white and the colors seem to match very well (on two test
prints, one with paper which has no FWA: Canson Platine; and one that does:
Canson Photo HiGloss).  Using the PROFILENAME_NoSP.icc to soft-proof (the
profile used to print) does not give the right paper white or colours (too
blue) . perhaps because the SoLux lamp is well below D50?

 

My reasoning is that PROFILENAME.icc has the correct illuminant / paper
information so it will soft-proof correctly, but it should not be used to
print (doing a Convert to Profile in Photoshop gives a bluer image for the
Canson Photo HiGloss image (presumably because of the FWA compensation?)).

 

Many thanks, once again!  

 

Robert

 

(BTW - the profiles generated using Argyll are really excellent, better than
the Canson-supplied profiles and better than the Z3100-generated profiles).

  

Other related posts: