ISIS and Canvas

[phero66]

I've been looking at an ISIS for awhile to get back into making my own profiles, having come from PrintFixPro several years ago.  

For the most part I will be measuring canvas and fine-art papers that are finished with a HVLP Clearcoat spray.  My main concern is media thickness, and while I do add a post-coating, it is not rolled so the thickness would not be increased too much.  Has anyone had much luck feeding material in the 430gsm or 21mil range?  The IO table would do this I know, but it is out of my price range at the moment.  The Lexjet Sunset Canvas I'm using now was profiled on a DTP-70, so this makes me think it would be possible...

Many Thanks,

-John

[Wayne Fox]

I've been looking at an ISIS for awhile to get back into making my own profiles, having come from PrintFixPro several years ago.  

For the most part I will be measuring canvas and fine-art papers that are finished with a HVLP Clearcoat spray.  My main concern is media thickness, and while I do add a post-coating, it is not rolled so the thickness would not be increased too much.  Has anyone had much luck feeding material in the 430gsm or 21mil range?  The IO table would do this I know, but it is out of my price range at the moment.  The Lexjet Sunset Canvas I'm using now was profiled on a DTP-70, so this makes me think it would be possible...

Many Thanks,

-John

Hopefully someone with real world experience will chime in here, but couldn't help doing some research myself, since I'm considering the iSis to replace the never used i1i0 table i have.

The iSis specs show it to handle thickness up to 0.08 inches.  As a matter of reference, the paper you mentioned is the same thickness as Breathing Color Canvas,  21mil.  1 mil is equal to 1/1000 of an inch, 21 mils is .021" thick, about 1/4th the of the iSis spec.  Should work for pretty much all papers and canvas.

The price range comment puzzles me however, as the i1i0 table is the cheaper solution.  Perhaps not so much so if you don't already have a i1 device to put in it, but still I think the iSIS would be more costly (but a far better device, well worth any additional cost).

[terrywyse]

I'll give an opinion from someone who's owned most all of these spectros or has used them at customer sites.

I've owned an iSis XL within a few months after the started shipping...maybe 3-4 years now....and it's been my primary spectro ever since. I owned a DTP70 before that. At the time, I thought the DTP70 was the best thing since sliced bread as it was easily 2x faster than the iCColor I had at the time....and that was about 3-4x faster than the Spectrolino/Spectroscan before that (still have a Spectrolino/Spectroscan-T but my iCColors have all been sold off).

Anyway, the DTP70 was a great spectro....blazingly fast and with switchable UV include/exclude filtration....but it's Achille's Heel was canvas and thick media in general. It would also have feeding issues with too-thin medias or very "slick" surfaces (I almost blew a 5,000 sheet press run because the DTP70 could not feed/measure the aqueous-coated press sheets!). So, while the DTP70 is probably the speed king in terms of measurement time, it tends to be very fussy with regards to media types.

The iSis on the other hand is a beautiful thing. It has nearly the same performance as the DTP70 but it will feed just about anything including canvas and even folding carton material (I occasionally do work for packaging customers). I've done quite a bit of canvas with my iSis XL and it's never had a problem. The repeatability of the iSis is even better than the DTP70. On repeat measurements of charts, I'll typically see <.10 dE variation. My DTP70 was just over that mark, in the .12-.20 dE range. The EyeOne and EyeOne iO have variations MUCH great greater than that which is why I won't own one for my professional work . I do own a couple of EyeOne Pros but they are mainly used for pressroom process control and display profiling, not for print profiling or proofing where I need better repeatability than either the EyeOne Pro or EyeOne iO can deliver.

With regards to the Eye-One iO table, I personally would not own one. It's Achille's Heel is repeatability and consistency across the table. I've seen variations upwards of 2 dE if the instrument height is not set correctly. Another telling test is if you take a chart, measure and save the data...and then measure the chart a second time but turning it 180 degrees on the table. Again, upwards of 1-2 dE variations from the same chart just rotated on the table. The upshot is that the height adjustment is way too critical and it varies a lot depending on the extension of the robotic arm. Unacceptable in my world although you'll find quite a few in the graphic arts and photography worlds. The iO is probably a bit more versatile than the iSis with regards to media handling but the iSis will handle most any media that is still flexible, it just won't deal with boards.

For my money, the Spectrolino/Spectroscan is still the king in terms of versatility (measure about anything, interchangeable filters, etc.). Most folks considering an EyeOne iO would be better served looking for a good used Spectrolino/Spectroscan. I STILL pull out my Spectroscan if I'm measuring matte fine art media and measure it with both the normal filter and the polarization filter. The polarization filter on the Spectrolino will make some of the best profiles from those "small gamut" matte fine art papers that you'll ever see. A cool trick is taking both normal filter measurements and polarized measurements from the same chart and then blending these two data sets together to sort of "tune" the color gamut and shadow rendering a bit. If you've ever struggled getting really good shadow detail out of an uncoated matte paper, polarization is the key...and only the Spectrolino/Spectroscan can do it.

My two cents is that the iSis is the best spectro going right now in terms of speed and media handling for normal photographic and proofing medias. For the things it can't handle, just get yourself either a Spectrolino/Spectroscan (if you can find one) or just a plain EyeOne Pro but NOT the iO.

Regards,
Terry Wyse

[terrywyse]

The Lexjet Sunset Canvas I'm using now was profiled on a DTP-70, so this makes me think it would be possible...

Just a side note from one who's done/tried canvas with the DTP70....if they made that profile from DTP70 measurements, I can almost guarantee that they struggled mightily getting canvas through that thing. Mine would handle up to about 18 mil (or was it micron?) canvas but as soon as I got above that, I had nothing but problems.....and you ALWAYS had to take the front cover off, force-feed about 1/8-1/4" of the canvas into the rollers if you were to have any chance at all getting it to feed that material.

With the iSis, I've done canvases, vinyls, etc. without problems.

If you're looking to get an iSis but don't have a good profiling package, X-Rite is offering a killer bundle with the iSis and MonacoPROFILER Platinum...you bascially get PROFILER Platinum for only $500 over the price of the iSis alone. That's practically a give-away of X-Rite's best profiling package. I also noticed on my price list that the iSis, both the A4 and A3/XL models, are fully $1,000 less than they were just a year ago.

Regards,
Terry

[phero66]

Thank you for your helpful info on the DTP-70, ISIS, IO and Spectrolino/Spectroscan - especially about the polarization filter.  I wonder why they no longer offer this as option on other products.  Aparently to get the DTP-70 to do canvas they had to make some sort of header out of thinner material, but they had told me it was a pain as well.  I don't plan on running tons of profiles, I just want to make very precise and good profiles for the custom materials I sometimes work with.  The Spectrolino/Spectroscan looks very interesting, the only drawback would be the time to scan, no other peculiarities?

Also another 2 questions about the ISIS.  Mine is on backorder so I have some time to build charts, spray them and get ready.  I downloaded Atkinsons charts for the ISIS and plan to run his 1728 vs the Colorport 1728.  Opening his XML files up in colorport re-arranges his color patches differently from the .TIFF files he provides.  I'm wondering if this will pose a problem if I re-arrange his charts through Color port to a different paper size (like Legal).

2nd Question: Is there any problem with bumpy materials being read in the ISIS?  Canvas is often not smooth, and even when I custom make my own materials and spray Inkaid onto them, the surface, though no longer showing a weave, does get a fairly toothy surface.  Add to that several layers of Clearcoat (ClearShield with a final coat of Liquitex Solvar Matte) and it becomes quite organic looking, though uniform as it is sprayed.  I already had one custom profile made through an IO and Monaco which gave me magenta cast in the neutrals, and the lab blamed the surface - it having too much tooth (and this had no clearcoat, just matte inkaid sprayed).  So with your background in these many devices would you still feel the ISIS could handle something like this (I actually don't think the surface is much different from a slightly toothier Satin canvas), or would you opt for the Spectrolino/Spectroscan?

Wayne, right now Chromix has $1000 off the ISIS and ISIS bundles with either PM5 Platinum or Monaco equivalent - which makes it very affordable, only thing you have to do is send in an old device, they have a list on their site under the ISIS section.  I bought a DTP-41 off ebay for about $150, and they can be had cheaper if you are not in a hurry.  If you are interested you should contact them, the i1 + IO + PM5 (even if getting a used i1, was much higher then the ISIS bundle.

[Pat Herold]

Terry's right, there's nothing quite like a polarizing filter on a SpectroScan table for bringing out the shadow detail on media like canvas.  We have a whole bank of them here and always use the polarizing filter for canvas and matte finishes.  The iSis makes a fine second though.  We have profiled many varieties of canvas with the iSis and have not had a problem feeding in the thicker material.

[phero66]

Matte coatings aside (I do love them, but I hate displaying behind glass so that is why I clear coat), is there any benefit to using the polarizer on media that would exhibit sharp/pointy highlights (probably there is a better way to describe them but hopefully this works), like on rough clear coated canvas/media or the newer satin based canvas products?  All my stuff will get additional spray coatings so it will never be shown in its original matte surface form but it will be slightly rough.  Also, the clear coating has UV inhibitors, and the final coating used to tame the glossier surface has some matting agents and more UV inhibitors but the surface still looks more glossy then semi-gloss type products.  Would any of these factors make you choose the polarized setup vs the ISIS?

[Pat Herold]

Well, yes.  The main benefit of the polarizing filter is to "line up" the light coming into the measurement instrument.  Canvas is notorious for having such an irregular surface, that light reflecting off of it can shoot in all different directions.  So polarizing that light helps to make that measurement more direct.  You generally find that polarized measurements come in a bit darker, which makes sense if there're not a lot of extra light reflections bouncing in there and confusing things.  You asked about other peculiarities.  The Spectroscans are noisy.  Well not so much noisy - but let me put it this way - you can get tired of listening to it roboticly move from one patch to another to another for an hour or so!  But this is supposed to be a thread about the iSis.  The iSis actually works very very well.  It's just in this area where some of us have found that extra shadow detail can be found with a Spectroscan.

[phero66]

Well, yes.  The main benefit of the polarizing filter is to "line up" the light coming into the measurement instrument.  Canvas is notorious for having such an irregular surface, that light reflecting off of it can shoot in all different directions.  So polarizing that light helps to make that measurement more direct.  You generally find that polarized measurements come in a bit darker, which makes sense if there're not a lot of extra light reflections bouncing in there and confusing things.  You asked about other peculiarities.  The Spectroscans are noisy.  Well not so much noisy - but let me put it this way - you can get tired of listening to it roboticly move from one patch to another to another for an hour or so!  But this is supposed to be a thread about the iSis.  The iSis actually works very very well.  It's just in this area where some of us have found that extra shadow detail can be found with a Spectroscan.

Your right, this is about the ISIS, so let me ask one more, possibly dumb, question.  Can you simply tape a sheet of polarizing film to the substrate, be it canvas or otherwise, and feed it into the ISIS?  Run one measurement without, one with, and average?

[terrywyse]

Your right, this is about the ISIS, so let me ask one more, possibly dumb, question.  Can you simply tape a sheet of polarizing film to the substrate, be it canvas or otherwise, and feed it into the ISIS?  Run one measurement without, one with, and average?

NOOOoooooo!  Seriously, I doubt it would work at all.

As far as the iSis vs. Spectrolino/Spectroscan and canvas/bumpy surfaces, the saving grace of the iSis is that it's taking multiple samples per patch so, in theory, the light bouncing/reflecting off the surface would sort of get averaged out from the multiple samples. The Spectrolino on the other hand is going to grab a SINGLE sample per patch...unless you increase the sampling to either 3 or 5 samples per patch. Better have all day to do that since it will take almost exactly 3-5x longer to measure to an already lengthy measurement process! Think HOURS of measurement time! (been there/done that with some 9,000 patch targets I've used!).

Also, if you're going to routinely measure charts in excess of about 1,500 patches, the Spectroscan layout is going to force those charts to 2 pages depending on patch size and gap. I just diddled with the 1728 patch RGB chart and it looks like you'd have to use <6x6mm patches with no gaps in order to squeeze that onto a single page. The iSisXL on the other hand can squeeze about 3,000 patches onto a single A3+ page and can be "hacked" to go to even higher single-page patch counts (I've "hacked" my install of ColorPort to allow 24" long charts...beyond about 24" you start to incur alignment issues).

Regards,
Terry

[Mark Paulson]

FYI for what it is worth. I just received my second iSis after waiting two weeks after the first one was determined to be defective. Neither one would work with Color Port. The second one died (no power light), so I pulled out the first one and it wouldn't come on either.  I normally have great confidence in X-rite products, but I have to say my faith has been shaken.

[phero66]

FYI for what it is worth. I just received my second iSis after waiting two weeks after the first one was determined to be defective. Neither one would work with Color Port. The second one died (no power light), so I pulled out the first one and it wouldn't come on either.  I normally have great confidence in X-rite products, but I have to say my faith has been shaken.

Mark I saw your frustration in your post, I hope they have offered you another ISIS from a different batch.  Mine is on backorder and won't be shipping until about 2nd week in May.  Perhaps this is due to a current batch issue?  How has support been through all of this?

Thanks Terry for the very strong guidence against making my own polarized version of the ISIS - didn't think it would work but thought I would throw that out for good sake   Hopefully with multiple readings many noisy surface characteristics can be averaged out.

[Mark Paulson]

Mark I saw your frustration in your post, I hope they have offered you another ISIS from a different batch.  Mine is on backorder and won't be shipping until about 2nd week in May.  Perhaps this is due to a current batch issue?  How has support been through all

Tech support has been great. Customer service not so hot.