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

  • From: <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 20:38:03 +0100

Hi Graeme,

 

I know I'm being a pest, but I would really appreciate an answer as to
whether my softproofing workflow is a legitimate way of softproofing or not.
As I said, the results are good and the workflow makes sense to me - but I
really don't understand the technicalities so I could well be doing
something wrong.

 

So:

*        Is the basic technique OK?

*        Why does FWA compensation seem to make virtually no difference when
I'm using a paper which I know to have FWA? I'm comparing an image and its
copy visually in Photoshop softproofing (with and without FWA compensation),
and also by:

o       Converting the image and its copy from Adobe RGB to the printer
Profile (with and without FWA respectively)

o       Assigning Adobe RGB to the converted images

o       Comparing the resultant files by putting them in layers (one above
the other) in Photoshop and setting the top layer mode to Difference (and
using a Levels command to enhance the difference . essentially no
difference)

 

Also, is there some way of manually adjusting the white point in the sp
file?  I'm finding that my softproof is a little on the warm side compared
to my monitor: I can adjust the monitor white point using the Eizo
ColorNavigator (and I then get an almost perfect match), but I would much
prefer to make the softproof a little cooler as I would then not to have to
change the monitor profile when I softproof different papers (that might
need slightly different tweaking of the white point).  Also not all monitors
have software that can do white point adjustment like ColorNavigator.

 

Many thanks,

 

Robert

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Behalf Of robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 8:56 AM

To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Soft-proofing in Photoshop with Argyll - correction

to my last post!

 

Hello Graeme,

 

Here are the commands I'm using for the Canson Platine profile:

 

targen -v -d2 -G -e8 -B8 -c " HP_Z3100_Canson Platine 310_Canson

Profile.icc" -f866 HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine (note: the reference profile is

supplied by Canson)

 

printtarg -v -ii1 -a1.0 -T300 -M6 -pA4 HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine

 

chartread HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine

 

illumread -S -c1 -H "HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine".sp

 

colprof -v -A"HP" -M"Z3100" -D"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine" -qh

-S"Eizo_CG277_Native_6500K_80cd".icc -cmd -dpe

-O"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine.icc" HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine

 

colprof -v -A"HP" -M"Z3100" -i"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine.sp"

-f"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine.sp" -D"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof" -qh

-S"Eizo_CG277_Native_6500K_80cd".icc -cmd -dpe

-O"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof.icc" HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine

 

rem colprof -v -A"HP" -M"Z3100" -i"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine.sp"

-D"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof_Not_FWA_Compensated" -qh

-S"Eizo_CG277_Native_6500K_80cd".icc -cmd -dpe

-O"HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof_Not_FWA_Compensated.icc"

HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine

 

The monitor is hardware calibrated and profiled using the Eizo

ColorNavigator with the i1Pro2: Eizo_CG277_Native_6500K_80cd.icc

 

The HPZ3100 printer is calibrated using its built-in spectrometer.  The

Z3100 is a 12-ink printer, so I guess using the built-in calibration is a

better option rather than trying to calibrate it with the i1Pro2.

 

Obviously, the printer is profiled using Argyll :).

 

I check the generated profiles using iccgamut and viewgam (and also using

GamutVision as this shows extra things like Black & White density response).

 

I use Lightroom to print and Photoshop CS6 to soft-proof.  Both use the

Adobe ACE CMM engine.

 

My document's profile is Adobe RGB.

 

The monitor profile is Eizo_CG277_Native_6500K_80cd.icc

 

Photoshop's working space is Adobe RGB.

 

I print the document from Lightroom using Relative Colorimetric with the

HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine.icc profile (produced by colprof without -i & -f).

 

I softproof in Photoshop.

 

I set the soft-proof "Device to Simulate" to either

HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof or to

HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof_Not_FWA_Compensated (makes no difference

as per my previous post).

 

I set the soft-proof "Rendering Intent" to Relative Colorimetric, "Black

Point Compensation" on, "Simulate Paper Color" on.  

 

BTW, I don't know what Photoshop CS6 (or Lightroom) is doing, but all

rendering intents simulate the paper color: so using the

HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine.sp in all cases does not give the simulated paper

white with Solux lighting (it gives the D50 simulated paper white), whereas

using HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof or

HP_Z3100_Canson_Platine_Solux_Proof_Not_FWA_Compensated does, again in all

cases.  I've also created D50 and D65 profiles (-iD50 -fD50 and -iD65

-fD65): when soft-proofed with the D50 profile changing from the print to

the softproof profile makes no difference, as expected; selecting the D65

profile with simulated paper color ON gives a much bluer color than with

simulated paper color OFF, which seems wrong as the monitor was profiled to

6500K and currently has a CCT of 6600K). 

 

The only other thing I do is to view the image on the monitor in a darkened

room at full screen mode, so no other whites to fool the eyes, and I

illuminate the paper using the Solux lamp. The paper and monitor are side by

side and the images are the same size. I have a rig that prevents light from

the lamp shining on the monitor or other surface, so that just the paper is

illuminated).

 

I can't think of anything else to add :).  Is this workflow essentially

correct, or is there a fatal flaw in it?

 

Many thanks!

 

Robert

 

p.s Once I get this sorted out correctly (with your help, needless to say)

I'll write a tutorial on how to do it, including batch files (this would

have been VERY helpful to me, although I have to say that doing it the hard

way is a great learning exercise, if one has the time).

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Behalf Of Graeme Gill

Sent: 04 June 2014 07:07

To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Soft-proofing in Photoshop with Argyll - correction

to my last post!

 

robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

 

> I'm trying to set up a good soft-proofing workflow using Argyll and I

would

> really appreciate a bit of help!

 

> 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:

 

> 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.

 

Hi,

 

There are a lot of details missing in regard to your soft proofing.

 

For instance, you don't say how you are actually doing it, ie. what profiles

form the rendering chain for your soft proof, what intents are used, or what

CMM is being used. You are at the mercy of all of those elements, + the way

the profiles are set up.

 

> 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?

 

This depends on the rendering intent - anything but absolute should give the

same white for both profiles, since the white will be the paper color.

 

Graeme Gill.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other related posts: