Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: Ken W on December 22, 2011, 07:04:09 am
-
I am interested in the X-Rite i1Photo Pro but am unsure whether I should get the UVcut version or the version with out the UVcut feature. I have an Epson 7900 that I want to make profiles for. Most of the time I print on Museo Portfolio Rag, a paper that does not have optical brighteners (OBs). But sometime I will print on papers that have optical brighteners.
I called X-Rite technical support and asked them about what they would recommend. The tech rep told me that the i1Photo Pro UVcut profiles of papers with no OBs would be identical in quality to profiles made by the the standard i1Photo Pro without the UVcut feature. The tech rep seemed to be recommending the UVcut model. I asked the tech rep that if in fact the UVcut model can produce equal quality profiles of non OB paper, then why do they make the model with out the UVcut feature. I did not get a satisfying answer to this question. This created some doubt in my mind.
Also, when I searched forums discussing this topic, I found one post by the digital dog, Andrew Rodney, indicating that if you can purchase only one version then the UVcut version would be the best version, but this is NOT IDEAL. This makes me wonder how not ideal is the UVcut version.
I want to be able to control the process of making my own profiles, rather than having them made by an outside service. I use a NEC PA271 display with the SpectraView II calibration system plus a Just Normlicht D50 viewing booth. I liked the idea of being able to use the i1Photo Pro to measure the color temperature of my booth and other possible viewing situations.
My budget allows me to purchase either the i1Pro Photo UVcut or the version with out UVcut, but not both. I am interested in the i1Photo Pro UVcut version, but am wondering if it will produce high quality profiles of non OBA papers.
I would appreciate any guidance that users of this equipment might be able to provide.
Thanks for your help, Ken
-
The question here is not about the instrument but more the software that will be used to create the profile. I use ArgyllCMS which is free open source software and it has provisions for taking into account OBAs when you do the profiling but this requires a non-UV cut spectro in order to do this (see this LINK (http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/FWA.html) for an explanation). I don't know whether the new X-Rite profiling software is able to take this into account with a UV-cut spectro since I have neither the software or the UV-cut instrument. The key issue for you to consider is how much printing you do with OBA containing papers.
-
Thanks for your response. I will be using the i1Profiler software, which comes with the i1Photo Pro package. This software does not compensate for OB. Currently I mainly use Museo Portfolio Rag an OBA free paper for my gallery prints. On occasion I may use papers that have OB.
I still have my original question. Is the X-Rite tech correct when they say the profile made using i1Photo Pro UVcut of OBA free papers will be the same quality as the profiles made using the i1Photo Pro without the UVcut? If this is correct it makes sense to get the UVcut version so that OB papers can be profiled.
-
Ken,
I used ProfileMaker 5 and 2 non-uvcut i1Pros (started with the A version and later purchased the faster B) for many years, using the OBA correction feature of PM5. Generally the results were ok, but with some papers not so good. Not sure it was because of the instrument uv characteristics, but I had to edit the blue channel for some printer/paper combinations.
When i1Profiler became available I bit the bullet and purchased both it and a uvcut i1Pro, and did several i1Profiler printer profiles comparisons with both OBA and OBA free papers.
1. The uvcut instrument is not accurate in the lower blue ranges, i.e. 380-400 nm readings will vary and generally won't agree with the non-uvcut instrument. I've read that the uvcut filter just isn't "sharp" enough to avoid impacting the lower blue wavelengths.
2. It is generally recommended to use a nonuvcut i1Pro for display profiling, although I did not do display comparisons, just continued to use the nonuvcut instrument.
3. I saw very little difference in actual print results for OBA and nonOBA papers, using profiles generated by both uvcut and nonuvcut i1Pros. I also inspected the profile internals with various tools, and there was very little difference between the Lab to device gray balance curves. HOWEVER, I did see differences in the backpath curves, i.e. the device to Lab values used for softproofing in Photoshop, for OBA papers the uvcut instrument based profiles were more accurate to my eye, and the gray balance curves were measurably different. Again, this difference only existed in the backpath curves on OBA papers, and the difference was slight but perceptible.
If only purchasing one device my advice is obtain the nonuvcut instrument. In most cases you won't have any problems, just be aware that for softproofing you might detect a slight inaccuracy.
Richard Southworth
-
Thanks Richard for sharing your experience. A couple of points:
1. I do want to have an accurate soft proof in Photoshop when I edit my images.
2. For profiling my NEC PA271 Display I use the SpectraView II system with the included NEC branded sensor, which I believe is a X-Rite i1Display 2 sensor that is tweaked to more closely match the wide gamut PA271. I am not sure if the i1Pro Spectrophotometer, included in the i1Photo Pro package, is equivalent to the new i1Display Pro, which is the new sensor NEC provides with the SpectraViewII. The i1Pro Spectrophotometer is compatible with the SpectraView II software, but I do not know if it would provide bettor results than the NEC branded/tweaked i1Display 2 sensor.
If I understand the information you have share. For non OB papers the nonUVCut version will provided a higher quality profile. For OB papers the nonUVCut version will provide a good profile but the soft proof in Photoshop may be slightly off in the white highlights.
-
No, the i1Display pro is still a colorimeter (not suitable for printer profiling). I prefer the spectro for display calibrating/profiling, although a good colorimeter may be more accurate in measuring the low tones.
"Accurate" soft proof is relative, it was just enough so that occasional images ended up with a slight yellow tint in the high mid-tones even though the same regions appeared neutral in the soft proof, given that I depended completely upon the monitor and didn't check rgb values numerically. I would consider brightness/contrast matching between the monitor and print a more significant challenge (as usual), it's easy enough to ensure good neutrals even with the slight shift once the tendency is known.
I'm not sure the quality difference is significant on non OB papers, just that the short wavelength blues are attenuated with the uvcut instrument. I believe these wavelengths have little effect upon the profile in terms of the ultimately generated tri-stimulus values. Otherwise your summary matches my experience.
Richard Southworth
-
I was thinking about i1Display Pro, which is the new sensor NEC provides with the SpectraViewII,and how it would compare to the i1Pro Spectrophotometer for calibrating my NEC PA271 display.
-
Richard you stated "generally recommended to use a nonuvcut i1Pro for display profiling". It is my understanding that the UVcut version filters the light it uses when measuring reflective patches. The filter does not filter ambient or monitor light that it is measuring. If this is the case there would be no difference between the UVcut and nocut versions for display calibration and ambient light measurements.
-
Display profiling still requires the calibration cycle, i.e. the internal light illuminates the white target thru the uv filter, so direct illumination readings in the shorter wavelengths are still suspect. I'm not sure whether or not inaccuracy for 380-400 nm would affect the results or not, but again if one is only going to own one instrument IMO it should be the non-uvcut.
Richard Southworth
-
Out of curiosity using Profilemaker Measure Tool I checked the spectrum (white patch) of my NEC EA231WMi monitor, attached. At least for my monitor there is very little energy in the shortest three bands, so I doubt that using the uvcut instrument would make much difference, assuming it didn't post false high values.
Wider gamut monitors may shift the blue primary somewhat and accuracy in this region may become more important.
Richard Southworth
-
Richard,
You stated "I saw very little difference in actual print results for OBA and nonOBA papers, using profiles generated by both uvcut and nonuvcut i1Pros.... for OBA papers the uvcut instrument based profiles were more accurate to my eye, and the gray balance curves were measurably different."
From this I assume you mean prints on nonOBA papers made from profiles generated by the UVcut instrument looked very close to prints on the same paper using profiles generated by the nonuvcut instrument? What about Photoshop softproofing of nonOBA paper profiles made with the UVcut instrument? Was the softproof accurate?
-
The “best” solution is to have a unit that can measure cut and no cut, build a profile both ways, examine. I’ve seen cases where UV Cut produces slightly superior results, cases where no Cut does. That said, if I had a gun to my head and had to get one, I’d probably go Cut assuming you are working with papers with high OBAs (something like -4 bStar or higher values reported by a no cut unit).
As for the display, the unit doesn’t matter when used in emissive mode (use Cut or No Cut).
-
Andrew, thanks for your input. Most of the time I print on Museo Portfolio Rag paper, a NON OBA paper, and only print occasionally on papers with OBs. My original question was if the UVcut version of the i1Photo Pro simply removes the influence of OB, why would it not do a good job with NON OBA papers. From my simple way of thinking, what is the harm of having a filter for OBs that causes profile errors, when the OB are not present. If there is no harm, then wouldn't it make sense, if you are only going to purchase a single package to make printer profiles, to purchase the UVcut version?
-
It depends on the quality of the filter that X-Rite use in making the UV-Cut spectro. It has the possibility of cutting off part of the visible spectrum if not implemented properly as Richard already pointed out in an earlier post.
-
Andrew, thanks for your input. Most of the time I print on Museo Portfolio Rag paper, a NON OBA paper, and only print occasionally on papers with OBs. My original question was if the UVcut version of the i1Photo Pro simply removes the influence of OB, why would it not do a good job with NON OBA papers.
The use a filter or not debate has been going on for years. The UV cut has to start and stop cutting somewhere, the question is, is this an ideal position?
-
Among color management experts is there a consensus about whether the i1Photo Pro UVcut package can produce high quality profiles of non OBA paper?
-
Thank you to those who provided feedback to my questions. After considering this feedback and reading several other threads on this forum discussing the same subject, I have ordered the i1Photo Pro standard (no UVcut) version. For other photographers facing the same decision, my reasoning is based upon several factors:
1. Presently my main paper is Museo Portfolio Rag a non OBA paper, which I use for making color landscape prints.
2. I sell my fine art landscape prints through galleries and direct sales and promote them as being museum quality. After doing additional research on OBA, it is clear that you can not market prints made on OBA paper as being museum quality.
3. I am interested in exploring papers that use the PK (photo black) ink. There are several high quality papers of this type that have no OBA.
4. The non UVcut instrument will help me to measure the amount of OBA influence present in the papers I profile.
Since my focus will be on profiling non OBA papers. It makes sense to get an instrument specifically designed for this purpose.
-
No real conclusions here, but a few random data points...
I just got around to re-profiling Epson Enhanced Matte and Lexjet Sunset Select Matte Canvas for my 8300. Both of those are of course notorious OB media. Used a uv-cutting i1 Pro Photo.
Comparing my uv-cut profiles to two different custom profiles for the canvas and one for the matte paper, I see a much more neutral rendition with my uv-cut profiles. In particular, gone at last is the red-to-yellow blush that has long plagued me on the canvas. Also, for the first time ever on canvas I can see adjacent RGB 8, 16, and 24 patches as distinct yet very dense tones. Do these improvements have anything to do with uv-cutting? Dunno, but just thought I'd mention it as I am very pleased with the results.
Also profiled OBA-free Canson Rag Photographique. Nothing to compare it to except the manufacturer's profile. Both profiles produce prints that would take a lot of nit-picking to tell apart. The uv-cutting was not harmful here.
Also worth noting that using Spectraview II my new uv-cutting i1 Pro Photo monitor profile is a little warmer than the quite cool calibration I was getting from my 4 or 5 year old i1 Display 2 puck. To my eye the i1 Pro profile is a better match to most of my prints including glossy RC's. NEC2690.
-
Bill:
Question, on your profiling the 2690 with the i1. I tried to use the i1 on my 2690, but after a few steps it wanted me to make adjustments to the brightness/contrast etc. and I wasn't sure where or how to make those adjustments to the 2690. This is using spectraview II software with the i1 Display Pro.
When you use the Nec puck, all the brightness/luminance settings are controlled in the software.
After reading your post, I may try and go back and try again with the i1 Display pro.
Paul
-
Bill:
Question, on your profiling the 2690 with the i1. I tried to use the i1 on my 2690, but after a few steps it wanted me to make adjustments to the brightness/contrast etc. and I wasn't sure where or how to make those adjustments to the 2690. This is using spectraview II software with the i1 Display Pro.
When you use the Nec puck, all the brightness/luminance settings are controlled in the software.
After reading your post, I may try and go back and try again with the i1 Display pro.
Paul
Hi Paul... If you're using Spectraview II or Spectraview Profiler (I own both), the software will control the monitor regardless of which puck you use. Doesn't matter if it's an Eye One Pro, i1Display Pro, i1Display 2, Spyder 3, or DTP94 (I've used all of these with SVII and the 2690), all you need to do is press the start button and that's it.
If it's not working for you then it would suggest that your video card does not support DDC. If your machine has an integrated Intel graphics card, that may be the reason as some of the integrated Intel graphics solutions don't play well with DDC.
Cheers, Joe
-
Joe:
Thanks for the clarification. I had it backwards, I was attempting to use the i1 Profiler software to profile the monitor. That is where it was asking me to adjust the luminance contrast etc. I am going to try with spectraview and the i1 again later today.
The other issue I have is that since i1 Display upgraded past 1.0.0 it constantly is telling me the monitor is out of calibration (you get a warning down in the
systray), easy to close that, but it is something that xrite should fix, in that their software is unaware that another calibration software is in operation, in this case Spectraview II.
Paul
-
Joe:
Thanks for the clarification. I had it backwards, I was attempting to use the i1 Profiler software to profile the monitor.
Ahh, that explains it. For starters, i1Profiler can't speak to the NEC monitors (nothing in the LCDxx90 series or PA series at least) which means the profile goes into the video LUT and not the monitor's onboard LUT. I have both i1Profiler and Spectraview II. You definitely want to be using SVII. It produces a much better profile on the 2690.
That is where it was asking me to adjust the luminance contrast etc. I am going to try with spectraview and the i1 again later today.
Yep, make sure you have the most recent version of SVII and you should be good to go.
The other issue I have is that since i1 Display upgraded past 1.0.0 it constantly is telling me the monitor is out of calibration (you get a warning down in the
systray), easy to close that, but it is something that xrite should fix, in that their software is unaware that another calibration software is in operation, in this case Spectraview II.
In both Basic and Advanced mode, if you go to the very last step (where you build the profile) there's an option to set the reminders... set that to off. The better plan of attack though is to nuke the i1ProfilerTray. It's pretty much useless for most people (it's just nag ware), X-Rite never asked permission to install it, and as you've discovered, it's damn annoying!!! In OS X, go to system preferences (apple menu), select users, click on your account, select "login items", click on i1Profiler Tray so that it is highlighted, and hit the minus (-) key at the bottom left hand side of the window to remove it. There is a checkbox that allows you to hide it... you don't want that. You want to just get ride of it completely. For Windows users, you'll want to remove it from your Startup Items folder.
Cheers, Joe
-
Now I've got both SVII and i1 Profiler nagging me about screen calibration! I rather like the SVII bootup nag, the countdown serves as my desktop momento mori (http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f161/Nymphalis/Vanitas/vanitas_stilleben.jpg). The i1 Pro nag is by comparison rather mamby pamby, just an occasional shy appearance at the bottom of the screen.
Tell you what, I'm not ready to go through any more manual screen calibrations, gotta zap the i1 nag. As long as SVII is around count me as a NEC customer.