I've been experimenting a bit more with the OBC workflow and an iSis XL
Has anyone been using this workflow for more detailed testing? Any observations/issues?
For example, if I do the OBA check, should I also think about measuring the light and using it as a custom illuminant in profile building (seems a lot of trouble to go to)
The OBA compensation checks use the same grey strips that were introduced with the iSis (and PMP5 module), but with any target.
During previous testing I've just been concentrating on building profiles for our iPF8300 and had not really pushed the OBC functionality (I tend to use papers with low amounts of OBAs and the profiles I've been getting are very good)
I'm not seeing a great deal of difference with the OBC step, which in some ways is good, since I'm getting good looking profiles anyway, however, it would be nice to know a bit more of what's going on and just what (if any) compensation/adjustment/incantations are going on in the normal (non OBC) profile building workflow.
Is it actually going to make things easier to ignore the UV reading capabilities of the iSis - this just feels wrong, even if from a practical POV it works ;-)
With PMP5 it was easy to make a pair of profiles (UV and UV cut) and see which worked the best - as far as I can see, I'd need to run the chart through twice and make two profiles - is there a short cut to get the software to ignore the UV data in a measurement file and just use the UV Cut?
I'm trying to get some good clear examples to add to the reviews and info I'm collecting on i1 profiler at
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/i1_profiler_overview.htmlAt the moment I've a pile of 'Holy' colorchecker prints sitting around, but the main UV source has set for the evening :-)
This from when I looked at OBC and the iSis with PM5 a couple of years ago - I remember that it took a really bright paper to show the effects.
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/isis_obc.html
