So I had to post this as a new thread only because of how pleased I am with the result (there, I spoiled the surprise
).
I've been using printer profile creation products for years, and have always been disappointed. From the early versions of ProfilerPlus (Datacolor), to SpyderPrint, to Argyll CMS, to i1Match, and a couple of others I either got poor results, or (in the case of Argyll) was not really inclined to go in the direction of a non-wizard based product (I did try it). And in the case of Argyll I blame myself, because there are certainly those who've used it to create excellent results. For the others, though, I went around and around with tweaking, reading from other users, tweaking, adjusting, and still could not get a result I was satified with. This is partly my problem I think because I seem to be super picky (although many on the dpreview Printer forum over the years have reported results similar to mine with the same tools).
I bit the bullet and got the i1Pro and i1Match, and still was not happy. Before I go any further let me be sure to state that I have a properly calibrated monitor (Sony GDM-FW900), a good work area with indirect neutral lighting, all the things you need to do for proper printing. I always got results which were enough off target in neutral grays to be noticeable to me. Print darkness (or lightness) was not an issue.
I bit the other bullet and spent the money on i1Profiler. Took sheets from my trusty stack of Epson Photo Paper (I use this for everyday casual printing), printed out a 1727 patch target (reading something here about picking a number that was not a multiple of 3), and let it sit for 48 hours before measuring with i1Profiler.
Long story short, while I haven't measured every color yet in a test target, I am now getting a dE2K of only .7 in pure grays, and visually at least the test images look spot on under D50 lighting conditions. dE2K of .7 may not seem all that great to you professionals here, but to me it's heaven sent. I never got a profile this good in all my years of hacking away with these other tools. Of course I don't think I would have been able to use these tools (even the ones from the past) effectvely without the help of the smart people here and on dpreview.
I only hope that I have the same kind of success with the "real" papers that I'll be profiling next (fingers are
definitely crossed).