[argyllcms] Re: Very poor results with 1000+ patch target.
- From: <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 08:16:27 +0100
HI Michael,
Just throwing in a couple things. If you can afford it I would personally
recommend the i1Pro2 over the ColorMunki if you want the best results. You
could get the i1Pro2Basic that's much cheaper but doesn't do print profiling
from the XRite i1Profiler, but will with Argyll. If I were you I would be
thinking of selling my ColorMunki and getting an i1Pro.
The second thing is that I did a lot of printing years ago on non-inkjet
card stock - it was card stock for the large commercial digital CMYK
printers (papers like the Fedrigoni Veltique). I was able, with a fair
amount of trouble, to print well using an Epson 4000 .. but the results were
very poor on an Epson 4800, with less sharpness and more murky colors. So
the printer you use and the inks it uses seems to make a big difference.
You really would be far better off using a watercolour paper that has been
treated by the manufacturer (as I mentioned, Canson for example produce the
Canson Arches in 240gsm and 310gsm and these are essentially the Arches
watercolour papers - Arches is a sister company to Canson). It's a really
beautiful paper used by the top watercolour artists and costs no more than
the watercolour paper itself. You will get stunning results with it. Or
use one of the other papers that has been recommended, also excellent
papers.
At any rate, good to hear things are going in the right direction!
Robert
_____
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Michael Gallagher
Sent: 08 October 2014 05:18
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Very poor results with 1000+ patch target.
Success! I made a 524 patch sheet, and using the ruler and slit I was able
to get this on running colprof:
Peak err = 1.633284, avg err = 0.377664, RMS = 0.441556
Here's the IT3 for anyone interested:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yjdn3a8lxyls2h8/Arches_524_i1.ti3?dl=0
I'm assuming this is pretty good, right? Either way, the resulting test
print was, by far, the best that we've seen. My wife and I are very happy
with it. Thank you all for the help. The next step will be to figure out the
scanner's accuracy, since that does seem to be off slightly.
Kamil and Alan: It turns out the ColorSync app DOES correctly print out
targets (of course, when "Print as color target" is selected). To test this
I cropped a strip of patches from a target, and printed two of them side by
side. One with ColorSync and the other with Adobe CPU. When comparing the
two rows, there is no difference between them at all.
Matthew: we're in northern Utah. The processes you mentioned sound very
interesting, and I would love to see that PDF. My understanding of color
matching is quite limited (my wife is the artist, but I'm a CS student and
I'm comfortable on a command line so figuring out ArgyllCMS became my
thing), but I am interested in seeing how others do manage to do stuff like
this. Do you coat your papers, or use inkjet watercolor paper, or anything
of the sort? One thing I'm noticing is that the thin lines don't seem to be
quite as sharp when printed. It's not that bad though. I'm assuming this is
just because I'm printing on a paper not meant for printing.
Graeme: Thank you very much for your suggestions. A couple questions: is
there much to be gained from optimizing the profile I have? e.g. running
targen -c with my new ICC profile. Also, after running colprof -v, the ICC
file shrinks in size. It went from 1.2 MB to 279 KB. Is that profile still
usable?
Thanks again,
Mike
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Kamil Tresnak <kamil.tresnak@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hello Michael,
maybe, the problem is in the printed charts, maybe there is a
difference between printed chart and ColorSync PDF export. Your
printed chart - seems like OK? Maybe you can find some colors which
are exactly same (CMYK source valueas) on both charts (maybe full
c/m/y) and make spot color measuring to ensure that you dont have
problem with printing output.
Regards,
Kamil Tresnak
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Michael Gallagher
<gallaghermikey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hmm... here's something I just noticed. In ColorSync, when I select "Print
> as color target", the colors in the little preview window end up changing
> drastically. Is this normal? I saved the preview as a PDF on the bottom of
> the Print window to show you guys. Here they are:
>
> Original Argyll generated TIF target:
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfp78d7oytepynh/1050_Arches%20Original.tif?dl=0
>
> ColorSync Target saved as PDF:
>
https://www.dropbox.com/s/b6pvvsgniw9misz/Arches%20ColorSync%20Target.pdf?dl
=0
>
> I'm going to try using Adobe's Color Print Utility to see if the same
thing
> happens during the print.
>
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 6:23 PM, Michael Gallagher <gallaghermikey@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Forgot to ask again: After I make this new target, is there any way to
>> > generate targets/patches from a JPEG to optimize the profile?
>>
>> That sort of thing is much more useful for input (camera or scanner)
>> profiles. In your case, what you'll want to do is use the "basic" profile
>> you're about to create to "pre-condition" the patch generation algorithm
in
>> targen; see the "-c" option.
>>
>> b&
>
>
Other related posts:
