When I tested the two options, I could see a better print from the i1P produced profile target than the older BA target. Reds were cleaner (less orange).
Hmmm... I'm curious to know why there would be much, if any difference at all? With 5202 patches under i1Profiler and the Atkinson patches, only 72 of those patches are really different. Both Bill and X-Rite from what I have observed are pretty much selecting equally spaced patch values unless
you're doing an optimization in i1Profiler. They both use values that are numerically equally spaced (Bill uses 16 bit precision, X-Rite truncates the precision or rounds down) counting in a trinary sequence. At 5202 patches you'd have 17^3 values or 4913 patches + 289 additional patches. In Bill's targets those 289 patches are actually just dedicated to greyscale of which there are only 256 discrete values, he just doubles up on a few numbers to make the chart visually appealing. Once I started looking at the actual numbers in the Atkinson profiles I became baffled as to why everyone thinks they're so great or magical (when I first got into this I was lead to believe (by reading the forums) that there was something special about Bill's profiles). Aside from the visual aesthetic of the charts and how they are laid out, there isn't really anything special about them (which got me thinking that maybe a lot of people were seeing a placebo effect?... I'll admit to being guilty of that from time to time :lol: ). I generated the numbers below in a spreadsheet and they are pretty much exactly the same numbers that the Atkinson profiles use (the Atkinson profiles only go out 3 decimal places).
And i1 Profiler would use this set (just truncating the precision, again, I generated the numbers in a spreadsheet and when I crossed checked them in the pxf file... they are identical)
So... if you generate a 5202 patch chart (which for testing purposes would be the comparison I would want to make) in i1Profiler, 4913 patches are going to be identical. The difference in your charts is going to come down to 289 patches. Actually if you further that analysis you will see that i1Profiler also generates a string of greyscale patches. For 5202 patches, i1Profiler specifically has 217 steps of greyscale patches so ACTUALLY... the difference between an Atkinson profile and an i1Profiler generated profile comes down to 72 patches out of 5202. 5130 of those patches are going to be the same. If you look at those 72 patches under i1Profiler, they are specifically applying a slight bias around the greyscale so if anything the difference you should see with the i1Profiler targets would (in theory) be more neutral black and whites as it has a comparison base for what is exactly x,x,x (where x is the same number) and what is slightly outside of x,x,x.
I actually have my own set of charts that I use, the numbers for which I've generated in a spreadsheet. I'm doing something very similar to what X-Rite is doing with i1Profiler (sometimes they make a difference and sometimes they don't).