When are new icc paper profiles needed?

[Fred Salamon]

When and under what conditions are new icc paper profiles needed?
For example:
new package of paper?
new ink cartridge(s)?
updated printer firmware?
other software changes?

[Mark D Segal]

(1) If you see the colour and/or tone of your prints beginning to drift more than usual from the monitor sof-proof it's time to reprofile both the monitor and the printer/paper combination.

(2) Normally it is not necessary to reprofile between batches of inks and papers if you are using brands that have a solid reputation for consistency over time.

(3) Normally it is not necessary to reprofile for firmware updates, but there could be exceptions in which case it falls under (1).

(4) Normally software should be stable in its use of colour management; if a software update throws colours or tones off, all else equal, the software needs to be fixed, not the profiling - that was one lesson of the recent Adobe experience. Sometimes new software versions bring along different interpretations of the image before doing any editing - here I'm thinking of changes to process versions in Lightroom. Normally in these conditions one adapts one's editing practices, not the profiling, to the extent these fresh interpretations are not colour management-based, but image interpretation based.

[HowardG]

When and under what conditions are new icc paper profiles needed?
For example:
new package of paper?
new ink cartridge(s)?
updated printer firmware?
other software changes?

What about changes in head height/platen gap?

Howard

[Mark D Segal]

What about changes in head height/platen gap?

Howard

I've never experienced a need to re-profile for this.

[digitaldog]

I've never experienced a need to re-profile for this.

For an Epson, with Epson papers, me either. But it might be possible with 3rd party papers or if there is a reformulation.

[Mark D Segal]

For an Epson, with Epson papers, me either. But it might be possible with 3rd party papers or if there is a reformulation.

Reformulation - very likely reprofiling is in order. On 3rd party [a[er. there are of course other paper makers having a good reputation for consistency, such as Ilford, Hahnemuhle, Canson, plus some. The more responsible ones will say whether they've changed the recipe in a way that would call for a new profile. And very often they rebrand the same product without changing a darn thing, and the extent to which some of these papers and profiles are pretty much interchangeable is - to say the least - "interesting" :-).

[HowardG]

Reformulation - very likely reprofiling is in order. On 3rd party [a[er. there are of course other paper makers having a good reputation for consistency, such as Ilford, Hahnemuhle, Canson, plus some. The more responsible ones will say whether they've changed the recipe in a way that would call for a new profile. And very often they rebrand the same product without changing a darn thing, and the extent to which some of these papers and profiles are pretty much interchangeable is - to say the least - "interesting" :-).

This makes me think about another question. I still have some old Ilford Gold Fiber Silk paper from before the company stopped making it and/or went under.....not sure what happened there.  I note that the paper is once again for sale but I am not sure if it is, in fact, the very same paper as before it had stopped being made. What it comes down to is....would profiles made for that early paper still be the appropriate profiles or was the paper reformulated in some way such that if purchased from new stock new profiles would be required? Is this known?

Howard

[Mark D Segal]

This makes me think about another question. I still have some old Ilford Gold Fiber Silk paper from before the company stopped making it and/or went under.....not sure what happened there.  I note that the paper is once again for sale but I am not sure if it is, in fact, the very same paper as before it had stopped being made. What it comes down to is....would profiles made for that early paper still be the appropriate profiles or was the paper reformulated in some way such that if purchased from new stock new profiles would be required? Is this known?

Howard

At first we were advised there would be zero change to the paper as a result of the change in brand ownership. Then it was discovered that there were minor changes. I've been using this paper for years and just for surety I made a new profile - it's no big deal to do that; but honestly, the difference it makes is minuscule.

[HowardG]

At first we were advised there would be zero change to the paper as a result of the change in brand ownership. Then it was discovered that there were minor changes. I've been using this paper for years and just for surety I made a new profile - it's no big deal to do that; but honestly, the difference it makes is minuscule.

Thanks Mark. It's a paper I always liked so I will continue with it. I didn't know if the quality remained the same apparently it has.

Thanks

Howard

[Mark D Segal]

Still a fine paper and well-priced for what it is.

[RHPS]

When and under what conditions are new icc paper profiles needed?

Surely the simple answer to this is, when the colour rendering has changed. The best way to monitor this is to have a reference print against which you can compare the current colour rendering. For me, the best kind of reference is not one of the "standard" printer test images but a very simple version of the GMB ColorChecker24. Mine is formatted as a single row of 24 patches as attached. My reference is trimmed to remove any white border on the long edge so I can place it directly on the strip I'm checking.

I find that holding a normal reference print in each hand is a poor way of comparing colours. Apart from that, the CC24 strip can easily be printed very quickly in the margin of a scrap print, saving time and paper.

[rxchaos]

(2) Normally it is not necessary to reprofile between batches of inks and papers if you are using brands that have a solid reputation for consistency over time.

I mostly use Canson Baryta and Hahnemuhle PhotoRag (and variants) and have been reprofiling every time I get a new box or roll.  Visually test prints made with the old and new profiles look the same.  Perhaps I don't need to reprofile. I was reprofiling only because I was under the impression that there could be a variation from one batch to another.

[Doug Gray]

Surely the simple answer to this is, when the colour rendering has changed. The best way to monitor this is to have a reference print against which you can compare the current colour rendering. For me, the best kind of reference is not one of the "standard" printer test images but a very simple version of the GMB ColorChecker24. Mine is formatted as a single row of 24 patches as attached. My reference is trimmed to remove any white border on the long edge so I can place it directly on the strip I'm checking.

I find that holding a normal reference print in each hand is a poor way of comparing colours. Apart from that, the CC24 strip can easily be printed very quickly in the margin of a scrap print, saving time and paper.

I highly recommend your approach. Easy to do as needed and very easy to compare against a saved reference print. It's easy on the paper and ink budget too.

[unesco]

This makes me think about another question. I still have some old Ilford Gold Fiber Silk paper from before the company stopped making it and/or went under.....not sure what happened there.  I note that the paper is once again for sale but I am not sure if it is, in fact, the very same paper as before it had stopped being made. What it comes down to is....would profiles made for that early paper still be the appropriate profiles or was the paper reformulated in some way such that if purchased from new stock new profiles would be required? Is this known?

Howard

I had, not so long time ago, a serious issue with a new pack of Tecco PFR450 (thick cotton smooth paper). It contained a paper which looked almost the same as previously (exactly the same white point and thicknes, the structure was a bit more rough and sound under my fingers was different), but in fact it was very different - totally different ink limits, overinking in some patches etc, QTR linearisation was also different then in previous packages. The manufacturer claimed they had not changed anything in the process, but the difference was obvious. They send me a new pack which was ok.
So, the conclusion is that it can happen even for the top manufacturers with their top papers.

[howardm]

I was pretty unhappy w/ the original Ilford profile and I have a bunch of smaller sheets so someone was kind enough to send me a sheet or 2 of old stock and I made my own.  I cant say if the new version of the paper is different but if Mr. Segal says miniscule, I'd believe it.

[BobDavid]

I'm a picky printer. I discovered that Hahneumuhle's ICC profiles for my Epson 7890 are better than the ones I am able to make with my X-Rite profile kit. Back in the day, when I used an Epson 4000 and a 9800, my profiles were better.

I recently acquired an Eizo CX241. It is more accurate than the CG-211 that I bought in 2008 (I still use it in a dual monitor configuration for viewing Photoshop tools/palettes).

I paid around $1K for the CX241.