Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look  (Read 5572 times)

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10399
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #40 on: June 06, 2017, 07:58:05 PM »



As Pat mentioned, we hound manufacturers continuously to add M3 to their instruments like the i1Pro, iSis and FD-9 but they haven't so far.
Steve

Of course not - let's remember who one is dealing with at least with i1Pro and ISis.  First they obsolete perfectly good equipment, and then they won't listen when knowledgeable professionals make serious suggestions to them It's typical X-Rite through and through.

Anyhow, on the broader question, thanks very much for all the experience you've brought to this discussion. Very helpful.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3519
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #41 on: June 07, 2017, 03:45:06 AM »



As Pat mentioned, we hound manufacturers continuously to add M3 to their instruments like the i1Pro, iSis and FD-9 but they haven't so far. M3 can cut down the light significantly so it slows the measurement process down, but for us it's worth it. Our SpectroScan tables with the Pol filter can take an hour and a half to measure a single target - which is why we have a bank of them. But again, when it's worth it, it's worth it.

I hope this helps.

Steve

I'm still curious whether a better integrating sphere would not do a better job than filtering out specular light reflection that is partly caused by the simpler 45 degr cone lighting found in the usual spectrometers. Both dynamic range and color information could be improved compared to both methods discussed in this thread.

http://blog.xrite.com/what-is-a-spectrophotometer/

https://www.avantes.com/products/accessories/item/269-integrating-spheres

I am aware of the standards in use for the graphic industry so I do not expect (affordable) instruments like that to appear for profile creation in this industry.

For B&W aficionados and their customized workflow/software/drivers to quadprinters the use of polarization filtered measurements could be a godsend. The more as they tend to edit their B&W curves or profiles to their taste too.


Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1002
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #42 on: June 07, 2017, 08:42:45 AM »

With all due respect to the experts at Chromix, I'm just not feeling the love for the M3 polarized measurement condition for routine use with smooth fine art matte media. Admittedly, I built just one profile, but Moab Entrada Rag Natural is highly representative of this broad class of matte finish media on the market today. Yes, M3 expanded the L* range in the data and the chroma range as well (not actually on the print) and it did open up deep shadows (definitely on the print) when compared to the profile built with the M0 data set. But the result is abnormally overcorrected in my opinion, and introduces other unwanted color and tone relationships, both in the print and unequally in the softproof thus rendering softproofing far less useful.  An L* minimum of 1.0 for Epson HP ink on Matte paper? Seriously, that is just one JND unit away from blackest human observable black, but the observed tonal range of the print under any normal viewing conditions one is likely to encounter in the real world definitely doesn't look like that.

Thus, I'm not personally seeing M3 data collection as a pathway forward for superior custom made profiles. That said, I do recognize that the M0, M1, and M2 data sets along with the 0/45 degree instrument geometry can somewhat understate the perceived black and deep shadows in matte media, so some type of error correction may very well be of some benefit. I am indeed surprised that the M3 data set doesn't alter the profile output in a much more heavy handed way, so I defer to Steve and Patrick's considerable judgement that they like the "error correction" provided by the M3 measurement condition. Again, the fact that this rescaled data set doesn't totally screw up the profile and provides some custom goodness that others apparently like, suggests to me a more controlled correction could be routinely achieved simply by using Excel to manipulate the data. One could easily import the text file, rescale the L* data to taste with or without messing with the a* and b* data, for example, then paste back into the CGATS text file to then be used to build the profile. I have never tried it before because, like the M3 data set, it will apply the correction to all the LUTS in the profile. Hence, a true profile editing app that lets you customize inverse transform separate from forward transform always seemed called for, but now I think Excel could do the trick and in less time than it takes to collect the M3 data.

Another day of learning something new :)

kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: June 07, 2017, 10:26:07 AM by MHMG »
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2504
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #43 on: June 07, 2017, 09:02:35 AM »

\ Again, the that fact that this rescaled data set doesn't totally screw up the profile and provides some custom goodness that others apparently like, suggests to me a more controlled correction could be routinely achieved simply by using Excel to manipulate the data. One could easily import the text file, rescale the L* data to taste with or without messing with the a* and b* data, for example, then paste back into the CGATS text file to then be used to build the profile. I have never tried it before because, like the M3 data set, it will apply the correction to all the LUTS in the profile. Hence, a true profile editing app that lets you customize inverse transform separate from forward transform always seemed called for, but now I think Excel could do the trick and in less time than it takes to collect the M3 data.

I pretty sure that ArgyllCMS will allow one to do something like this (though it would be nice to have Graeme Gill weigh on to make sure).
Logged

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3519
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #44 on: June 07, 2017, 09:06:00 AM »

Hence, a true profile editing app that lets you customize inverse transform separate from forward transform always seemed called for, but now I think Excel could do the trick and in less time than it takes to collect the M3 data.

Another day of learning something new :)

kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Which Kodak Colorflow Custom Colors could do I think.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots
Logged

rasworth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 111
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #45 on: June 07, 2017, 09:57:43 AM »

I believe there is an issue with the Red River/Chromix profiling strategy that hasn't been directly addressed.  I teach people how to use Photoshop, including a heavy dose of soft proofing.  As has been pointed out the soft proof with these type of profiles is essentially useless for print prediction, it is definitely NOT a subtle effect, I've built a custom Etching profile and compared its soft proof to the RR profile.

Up to now I've advised my students to download the paper manufacturer's profiles and use them for soft proof and printing.  If the results are satisfactory, which they usually are, then no custom profile is needed.  However given the RR approach I feel I now have to examine each profile before anybody I advise uses it.

Red River/Chromix should include in their profile usage instructions a description of the polarizer effect upon soft proofing, and perhaps consider offering an alternative profile that is built without polarization.  Anything less is a disservice to their customers.

Richard Southworth
« Last Edit: June 07, 2017, 10:10:06 AM by rasworth »
Logged

Steve Upton

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #46 on: June 07, 2017, 04:09:41 PM »

An L* minimum of 1.0 for Epson HP ink on Matte paper? Seriously, that is just one JND unit away from blackest human observable black, but the observed tonal range of the print under any normal viewing conditions one is likely to encounter in the real world definitely doesn't look like that.

I don't disagree with you there

...suggests to me a more controlled correction could be routinely achieved simply by using Excel to manipulate the data. One could easily import the text file, rescale the L* data to taste with or without messing with the a* and b* data, for example, then paste back into the CGATS text file to then be used to build the profile.

If this were sufficient then I assure you, we would have been doing it years ago.

You can do a lot in math, overall, but you can't cheat the physics.

It's analogous to getting a scan from a consumer-level scanner and not being happy with the blacks. Just setting a new black point in Photoshop isn't going to open up the shadows while it darkens the image. If the data wasn't there in the first place... well, you know.

Also, as I mentioned in my earlier post, the calculation and use of the profile effectively scales the output dynamic range automatically.

....As has been pointed out the soft proof with these type of profiles is essentially useless for print prediction, it is definitely NOT a subtle effect, I've built a custom Etching profile and compared its soft proof to the RR profile.

Up to now I've advised my students to download the paper manufacturer's profiles and use them for soft proof and printing.  If the results are satisfactory, which they usually are, then no custom profile is needed.  However given the RR approach I feel I now have to examine each profile before anybody I advise uses it.

Overall I agree but I also caution against considering the measurements of a non-M3 device to be correct. I'm sure they're what people are accustomed to but the reality is really found somewhere between the M3 measurements and non-M3.

Red River/Chromix should include in their profile usage instructions a description of the polarizer effect upon soft proofing, and perhaps consider offering an alternative profile that is built without polarization.

That's a good idea. We'll also review here (@ CHROMiX) some techniques for improving M3 measurements for the soft-proofing part of profile use.

We tend to be very focussed on the rendering capabilities of our profiles - which I think we would all agree is the more important function for photo work - but it sounds like we could improve the proofing side of things as well.

Thanks everyone for your reasoned feedback

Steve
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2504
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #47 on: June 07, 2017, 05:25:26 PM »

I just printed out two test prints with the Outback set of images.  I won't have my own profile until tomorrow when the ink is dry and I can do the spectro readings.  I also have a test print of Hahnemuhle William Turner.  The Red River paper looks quite a bit like the Hahnemuhle paper but with slightly less texture.  I don't know the Epson textured papers at all so I cannot say provide a comparison.  In terms of the most visible black patch, I can see the patch #6 black patch on the William Turner paper but not on the Red River.  #8 patch is visible on the RR paper.  In terms of the white patches, I can see patches at #250 but the William Turner is a little more visible.  The yellow on the RR print seems a little off.  The aspen leaves are not as vibrant and the yellow patch seems a little muted.

I'll know a little more when I prepare the profile.  I think in terms of a textured paper, I still prefer the better texture of William Turner.  Looking at prices, the William Turner appears to be about $6 a box more than the Red River paper (Letter Size sheets).
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1002
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #48 on: June 07, 2017, 06:14:31 PM »

In the Aardenburg color target I posted earlier in this thread there is a black stripe running along the bottom of the image. In that stripe are sets of numerical values 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 followed by letters, R, G, B, C, M, or Y.  the values 1-5 are, you probably can guess, encoded in increasing lightness values going from L* = 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and each letter is L*=6. I consider these to be the deep shadows in a digital image that a great print shouldn't throw away.  If an output profile made with M0 measurements can print those deep shadow values in a perceptibly smooth ramp away from the stripe's max black (RGB = 0,0,0), then, IMHO, there really is no deep shadow problem to be concerned with on account of measuring one's profiling target data with the M0 condition. My own rolled profiles are usually able to print those values cleanly, so again I see no need to resort to M3 measurements to solve a problem I usually don't have.  The profile I did make with the M3 measurements actually overcorrected, and worse, there was a subtle but still disconcerting visual jump between 5-15 in the higher shadow values  that was then leading to an oddly flatter tone response for some colors in the 15-30 L* range. There were other subtle tone and color reproduction issues as well which could be seen in other areas of the 12 hue planes in that target. Perhaps the folks at Chromix have their own custom profiling software that works better with the M3 data sets. I only have access to i1Profiler, PM5, and BasicColor software and the M3 data set isn't playing as nicely as I'd like to see with those profiling apps.
 
When I do run into trouble with the lowest shadow values plugging up it is generally due to over inking by the printer.  With limited "media settings" to choose from on typical desktop photo printers and the fact that some manufacturers do a better job at linearizing the printer than others, sometimes the reproduction of those deep values is not quite as good as I'd like. The 1, 2, and 3 L* tones can plug up in some of the colors, even the gray ramp. That said, my Canon Pro-1000 has beautiful ink ramps. It's a joy to build profiles for that printer, and the deep shadow detail is all there. My Epson P600 slightly over inks in the photo gray channels on some media/media setting combinations such that a minus percentage value in the density slider found in the printer driver's advance setting menu will help alleviate.  Unfortunately, that density slider is a global one affecting all the ink ramps, so system color gamut can be lost if one tries to take the slider far enough negative to fully open up the grey channel ramp. It ends up being a bit of a compromise for some matte media. Glossy/luster papers rarely have an issue with the deep shadow reproduction values.   Perhaps M3 measurements might be a way to rescue an over inking situation, however, paying close attention to what media is being selected to build the profile is usually the place to start.

Lastly, as for soft proofs needing some tweaking because the M0 data isn't a perfect match to what we see in the print, a good portion of that mismatch actually has nothing to do with the M0 data. It has to do with the customary way display profiles remap monitor white and monitor black luminance values to L=100 and L=0 respectively, no matter what the actual luminance range of your monitor really is. To simulate a true zero to 100 L* range the monitor's luminance range has to be over 700:1 (I've forgotten the exact calculation, but it's over 700) Many new monitors claim to have those specs, but in reality a great many fall short. Also, unless you don't mind image editing in a cave, the ambient room lighting adds a little veiling flare to your perception of monitor blacks. The end result is that the posted L* shadow values will be lifted a little lighter in reality and that contributes to the perception that the softproof of a matte paper is just a little bit flatter than it should be. The display's baked in tone curve error is not a big error, but it does add to the lower image contrast problem for softproofing matte media especially. I studied this display profile scaling error extensively in the days of CRT monitors that typically had luminance ranges no better than 400:1. I found that by using a profile editor like the one in the Profilemaker 5 suite or Kodak Colorflow software (as Ernst noted earlier) I could correct any perceived M0 data deficiencies and compensate for the actual display errors quite nicely just by rescaling the tone curve in the inverse transform LUT of the profile such that matte media black values of typically 17 or 18 would then post to the softproof view as if they were L*min of  approximately 4L darker, e.g. 13-14.  Thats all it took to get a near perfect match, and nowadays with higher contrast displays, I don't go to the trouble of making this profile edit anymore. I've learned to live with the slightly lower contrast in the softproof. It actually works to my advantage because it forces me to pay very close attention to the image edits needed to lay the image down beautifully on the print.

kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: June 07, 2017, 07:16:38 PM by MHMG »
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2504
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #49 on: June 08, 2017, 02:21:21 PM »

I just finished profiling the paper using ArgyllCMS with a 51 step B/W patch set (overkill, I know).  It was done with an i1 Pro with no UV cut.  The profile had a very low standard error.  I get a black point of L* = 18.8 which is slightly higher than I got for my William Turner profile and it's also in the same range as other matte papers that I use.  I don't see as good separation in the very dark shades as with the available RR profile indicating that the expanded B/W range using a polarizing filter may lead to better separation.  Looking at the Outback test image critical points I see little difference between the colors from the RR profile and the one I created. I also printed the Aardenburg hue target that Mark posted yesterday.  Using my profile I could see the separation he mentioned. 

I don't print B/W images on textured papers, preferring a smooth surface.  Blocking up of the dark ranges are of less concern for me.  Since I like the better texture of the William Turner paper, that will be my paper of choice when I need a non-smooth surface for an image.
Logged

rasworth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 111
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #50 on: June 08, 2017, 02:45:48 PM »

Quote
Using my profile I could see the separation he mentioned.

Alan,

Were you able to see the L*=1-6 characters for all seven groups in the black strip, per Mark's description?

Richard Southworth
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2504
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #51 on: June 08, 2017, 03:03:26 PM »

Alan,

Were you able to see the L*=1-6 characters for all seven groups in the black strip, per Mark's description?

Richard Southworth
Yes, though there is some blocking up between the first two groups.  I only printed that test out with my profile, not the one prepared for Red River.
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1002
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #52 on: June 08, 2017, 06:03:29 PM »

Yes, though there is some blocking up between the first two groups.  I only printed that test out with my profile, not the one prepared for Red River.

Perhaps it may be helpful to discuss what L*=1, 2, 3  means visually in the CIELAB color model. All three values are very close to full black.  One unit of L* change without any change in a* or b* creates one JND (just noticeable difference) with a probability of 50% that the viewer can perceive that difference under the viewing conditions where this color modeling was originally conducted. So, going from maximum digital black L*=0 in the image file (i.e. RGB = 0,0,0) to L*=1 in the neutral (no chroma) direction should be barely noticeable not easiliy noticeable. For L*=2 increase the probability that it can be noticed jumps to about 95%, ie. most people can see that step under good lighting conditions with high certainty, but it's still a just noticeable change not an easily noticeable one.  If those values become easily noticeable in the reproduction, they are actually over corrected. By the time we get to L=5 it should be a very easily noticeable difference from black. If a printer is not separating the deep shadows well then that 5 level in the image can get pushed down to the 1 or 2  in the print and even back to max printable black if the printer's tone curve is clipping the shadows.

All that said, one other factor, lateral adaptation, comes distincly into play as dark areas in the image get smaller and the surrounding image area gets lighter. This is the case with the Aardenburg target. The stripe is pretty thin at the bottom of the overall image and surrounded by much lighter areas. Thus, even on the monitor, those numbers and letters embedded in that black stripe can appear to merge into black unless you get your eyes closer to them (e.g. by zooming in on the image in your display or by examing the print at close distance and with very good light. So, with those caveats in mind, one can learn to visually assess those numbers and letters in that stripe along with other color and tone ramps in the Aardenburg iStar color target in order to evaluate whether shadow details are printing too dark, too light, or just right :)

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: June 08, 2017, 06:08:54 PM by MHMG »
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2504
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #53 on: June 11, 2017, 04:00:27 PM »

I finally had some time to generate some more data and compare the profile that I made using ArgyllCMS and the one that is on the Red River site which I believe was done by CHROMiX using a polarizing filter to do the spectral readings.  This is where things get pretty interesting.  As I noted the other day, the visual prints look pretty much the same.  Both are printed using the Velvet Fine Art setting which is what I used to do my profiling and what Red River suggests as the setting.  However, the measured gamut volumes are hugely different.  I only have the ArgyllCMS command line tools to do analyses.  Here are the calculated volumes:

Red River Profile:  774514
Alan's Profile:  482558
Alan's Profile of Ilford Gold Fibre Silk:  814289
Alan's Profile of Hahnemuhle Photorag Ultrasmooth (a matte paper I often print on):  491824

Using a polarizing spectro to do the readings has an impact on the measurements but does this translate to something that is visible.  I'll defer to someone else who wants to do some profiling of this paper and do a visual comparison.  I did some comparing of some color patches of the Outback test image and didn't much of difference either in the printed versions and looking at the profiles on my screen and using the Affinity Photo color pick tool.  So the CHROMiX generated profile does not have quite the gamut of Ilford Gold Fibre Silk but is much larger than the other two matte paper profiles that I prepared.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10399
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #54 on: June 11, 2017, 04:07:20 PM »

Alan,

Your results look more like one would expect.

What printer?
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2504
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #55 on: June 12, 2017, 07:47:33 AM »

Alan,

Your results look more like one would expect.

What printer?
Epson 3880 and I made sure to download the correct profile from the Red River website.  It's tagged Epson 3880.  Can you clarify your statement that I have highlighted.  I don't intuitively understand why the gamut volume should be so high for a matte paper.  If the use of a polarized light source is so important it means that a lot of profiling that one does without such a source may be of questionable value.  I only have Argyll so I cannot say whether one using other profiling software would obtain similar results.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10399
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #56 on: June 12, 2017, 08:20:14 AM »

Epson 3880 and I made sure to download the correct profile from the Red River website.  It's tagged Epson 3880.  Can you clarify your statement that I have highlighted.  I don't intuitively understand why the gamut volume should be so high for a matte paper.  If the use of a polarized light source is so important it means that a lot of profiling that one does without such a source may be of questionable value.  I only have Argyll so I cannot say whether one using other profiling software would obtain similar results.

Hi Alan,

Yes, what I meant with that statement is that the profile which RR provides for its Palo Duro Etching paper, which is a matte paper, has a gamut volume that far exceeds anything I have ever seen for a matte paper - in fact reaches well into expectations for a PK paper, and I measure a lot of them. The result you obtained in your own profiling with Argyll is much more in line with expectations for a matte paper and therefore on the face of it more credible.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

dasuess

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14
Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #57 on: June 12, 2017, 10:50:09 PM »

I received my sample pack today, so I immediately loaded the RR profile for PDE for my Epson R3000, went into LR and printed a profiled (not ABE) BW image. I have no measurement equipment so this is a purely subject assessment. I am very impressed with how rich and deep the blacks appear. I plan on ordering more PDE while it's still 20% off.

Edit:  ABW, not ABE

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: June 12, 2017, 10:53:16 PM by dasuess »
Logged

GWGill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 405
  • Author of ArgyllCMS & ArgyllPRO ColorMeter
    • ArgyllCMS
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #58 on: July 10, 2017, 08:57:44 PM »

Iíve worked for CHROMiX over 10 years now, and that whole time Iíve watched Steve Upton pounding the drum for polarized measurements at every chance he gets.   He does not keep it a secret.  We have hammered on X-Rite to put polarizing filters in more of their instruments.  We had Konica Minolta personnel from Japan in our offices just last month, and he was selling the virtues of polarized measurements to the actual instrument makers.  Weíve brought this topic up in trade shows, conferences - weíve mentioned it in our blog, in our newsletter.     So from the profile producerís point of view, itís rather frustrating that knowledgeable people in the industry still donít seem to know about or consider polarized measurements.
http://blog.chromix.com/2010/04/
Why ? Few observers will be wearing polarized sunglasses !

It's pretty simply - for creating profiles for reproduction for human observers, the best measurements are those that closely mimic what a human observer sees. So unless you are assuming all your viewers are wearing polarized glasses, it's hard to understand your enthusiasm for polarized measurements!

To put it another way - how does it help for the profile to show a fake, super-good black point when it looks nowhere near that black in real life ?

Quote
Certain media types benefit from polarized measurements because the polarization filter helps the light from the surface enter the spectrophotometer at a more direct angle.
Care to re-phrase that explanation in scientific terms rather than hand wavy terms ?

[ From a technical measurement point of view I can see that polarized measurement will greatly improve the
Signal to Noise (S/N) ratio of the measurement of darker colors, but the resulting numbers should then be
restored to visual correspondence (by adding back in the correct level of diffused specular reflection)
before being used to construct a profile that represents the real world. But the visual significance of the
extra S/N (= accuracy) will be diminished by the very real diffused specular component from the paper. ]
Logged

dasuess

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14
Re: Red River Palo Duro Etching matte paper on Epson 3880 - first look
« Reply #59 on: July 11, 2017, 09:40:14 AM »

I have been doing some test prints on the RR PDE paper. I really am impressed with the blacks, but I (and others) have noted over saturated orange colors. Is this a profile issue, or some setting in the driver? Would playing with the Epson Color Density setting help or should I just look at having a custom profile created for my R3000?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up