Simulate Paper Color should make the soft-proof more accurate, not less, so there is still something wrong here.
I am aware of that. Let me add a thing. Most people I know would say that everything in my color management looks perfect, including most importantly the final result. A lot of my colleagues, whose monitors I have seen, would not notice the problem, or even if they would, they would not bother. I mean to say, that even if I say, that color and brightness are off, things are relative. But for my standard, for your standard, for our standard things are simply off. And something is definitely wrong here since I got a, without any doubt, better monitor, the PA241W.
So I hope that "Simulate Paper Color" will again be of use. Only, what I understood from "tho_mas" is that sometimes it is better to leave it unchecked. I can see an immediate example for that. In the few Epson 3880 canned profiles I use, checking SPC is ok. The Canson canned 3880 profile for CIFA Platine is better with SPC unchecked. Now when I try to use CIFA Baryta Photographique things are worse, because I found absolutely no way of making my colors match the screen. Whatever I do. All this became clearer with the help of "tho_mas"'. I also see that the canned profiles for the 3880 and the 9900 give me very different results, even I soft proof for each on separately.
There hasn't been much discussion here about your monitor settings. Even working in a rather dimly lit environment, 80 cd/m2 is VERY low.
That was one of my problems. I continued to turn down the monitor, as prints did not get bright enough. There was change, but not enough. When I hit 80, I realized that I will need help with this
One would expect a more correct setting to be in the range of 100~120.
"tho_mas"'s questions made me reconsider my whole settings. I started all over again. Calibrating by trying to match paper color visually, which is an extremely difficult task. I am unable to accomplish this to my satisfaction. I tried to measure it, but things are worse. Presettings of 5000, 5500, 5800... all left me unhappy till now. So with the NEC PA241W I started also to be more demanding, as it is such a good piece of equipment. With a click of the mouse I can change settings. It's amazing. So right now I have a targeted each of my few papers regarding the white point. For example around 4700K x 0.3526 y 0.3584 is close to a visual match for me, the PA241 and JUST@5000K. Luminosity ranges between 110 and 120.
From your first post, you appear to be suggesting that the problem started with the new monitor - the NEC PA241.
You are right. And, as I said, the exchange with "tho_mas" made me go through this recalibrating, rethinking. I could not go lower than 80cd/m2. So I went back to 120 and left Simulate Paper color unchecked, as per instruction. And it got a lot better, maybe very good
Even for the colors quite close, but not close enough. In my understanding this must be due to a poor profile, right? With a better profile SPC would presumably also work well (I still don't know to whom in America, to send those targets for profiling).
What hardware and software you profiling this monitor with
NEC MDSVSENSOR and SPectraViewII
and what calibration settings are you making for the monitor profile. [...]
White point: function of paper white (BTW I normaly use OBA free papers)
Contrast: Monitor default (around 375:1 for these conditions. I hope that this default means minimum neutral black. High Delta E numbers I get for the blacks might suggest otherwise??)