[argyllcms] Re: Testing my new printer

  • From: Yves Gauvreau <gauvreau-yves@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2019 06:32:38 -0400


my printer is the same as yours (Pro-1000) and I used a letter size sheet of Hahnemuehle fine art baryta paper. I use the same test or standard image as you do every time I want to have an idea of what a paper can give me. Now I do this part a bit differently to save ink.

In the docs it is mentioned this: "When images are stored in large gamut colorspaces (such as. L*a*b*, ProPhoto, scRGB etc.), then using the colorspace gamut as the source gamut for gamut mapping is generally a bad idea, as it leads to overly compressed and dull images. The correct approach is to use a source gamut that represents the gamut of the images themselves." Since I print just as you do most of the time, from Lightroom I wondered if my prints where impacted in the way the doc mention because Lightroom uses the ProPhoto RGB colorspace by default, and because this effect seemed to be barely noticeable on the relatively large gamut papers I use most of the time. I notice thought that on some papers with a smaller gamut, the result are much less interesting or kind of dull but again all this is subjective.

I'm not sure but I think Graeme mentioned to someone about his method that folks at Adobe for example may very well do something similar without letting you know about it. I know that Adobe is adding a curve to there Adobe Standard profile on each raw conversion Lightroom or ACR does, it makes the image "look" better but at the expense of dynamic range (reduction) and many times it increases clipping of the highlights and it also reduces highlight details in many case.

So I wonder if someone here as a method or suggestion of evaluating all of this more objectively and or accurately then just comparing standard prints visually?


On 7/5/2019 8:42 PM, Alan Goldhammer (Redacted sender agoldhammer for DMARC) wrote:

You do not say what the make of the printer is and what type of paper you will be printing on.  Most RGB printers are well behaved and I do not see the need to use exotic approaches to printing.  I print directly from Lightroom on my Canon Pro-1000 as it is the most convenient way to print as one only needs to set things up once and then save the preset. I do my profiling using Argyll for the papers I print on.  I evaluate profiles visually using this test print: http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi049/essay.html which has various standard images that have been used for some years now.  I do soft print in Lightroom but only to correct for certain colors and hues as soft proofing for out of gamut colors is notoriously poor.


*From:*argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Yves Gauvreau
*Sent:* Friday, July 5, 2019 6:16 PM
*To:* argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [argyllcms] Testing my new printer


I started testing my new printer with an image that as colors outside the gamut of the paper as per ColorThink 2.3.3 to see if there would be a benefit in using the "*Image dependent gamut mapping using device links <https://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#LP3>*" method and printing from Photoshop and I don't see any difference at least visually.  I know this is amateurish to say the least.

So is there a mean to evaluate this process (using the image gamut) more "properly" and more exactly?


Other related posts: