Better Dmax with Profilemaker 5 than i1Profiler

[Scott Martin]

Based on my work, that indicates you need to send a lot more differing images, real and synthetic through both because depending on a lot of factors, MonacoPROFILER can indeed show better results.

I've printed ALOT of images, on a lot of processes. I do agree that one might like features in one profiling solution over another in different situations. There are advantages sand disadvantages to easy system. But do tell me more about your observations, particularly regarding Dmax on RGB inkjet profiles (since that's what I think we're talking about here)!

[digitaldog]

I've printed ALOT of images, on a lot of processes. Tell me more about your observations, particularly regarding Dmax!

It isn't solely about Dmax! The tests were designed to look at as much of what's happening within color space as possible.

I can't go into detail for the following reasons:
1. The project is under NDA.
2. Many of the images used to exmaine the results of the profile were developed by Karl Lang (I name I suspect you recognize) and they are his properly. But they are designed specifically to look at many areas of color space and detect issues with the color engines and they do an amazing job of this task.
3. This was CMYK output on very specific kinds of presses and substrates so YMMV depending on what you are profiling.

I can say that it was easy to see some issues with blue mapping from Copra profiles where it won in all other areas. I'll point out that sending reports to them resulted in quick fixes to improve this mapping although not enough to our full satisfaction. But it was really nice to deal with a small company that both recognizes they can improve their profiles and did so quickly enough that we could use them for this job.

For reasons I can't discuss, all the testing was done with Perceptual rendering. That opens a lot of potential can of worms as you know.

None of the various profile packages were perfect, none didn't show some flaws. In the end, it was about selecting which deficiencies we could live with and again, in some cases i1P profiles were used in process A while Copra was used in process B. PROFILER in process C, etc. Again, you have to spend a lot of time and with the right tests to determine this but I'll say, based on this work, i1P was not the winner in all cases, hence my suggestion you throw a lot of images and output into the testing before picking!

[Scott Martin]

Andrew, yes, I'm not surprised that you're seeing better results elsewhere for CMYK profiles and of course I know Karl, but what I'm trying to get to the bottom of here is Narikin's assertion (as I understand it) that i1P's RGB profiles have poor DMax. I'd love to hear from him, get his name (so that I can look up the profiles I did for him that's he's saying were poor) and hear what printing process he's talking about. Something just doesn't sound right there...

[JRSmit]

So re-reading this old thread, what is the recommended path for getting best out of i1 profiler now - use Sat or Colorful intent? increase ink density +5/10/15% on the Epson panel? reduce or increase the smoothness slider?

It is very confusing - but I, like others here, found that i1 Profiler reduced the DMax compared to profiles made on older software. Generic profiles made by the paper manufacturer 3-5 years ago on PMP often give far better max density in all colors than i1 profiler, but do not have the smooth gradations Profiler does. You win something, you loose something - it is very smooth, with no uneven color steps, but at a real hit to max density of each 100% CMYK squares. not good. The explanations of i1 attempting to neutralise the black at cost to density make some sense, but do not explain all.

I was lucky enough to download the optimizer chart & a page grab when it was released (the blog post and link has subsequently been removed by x-rite) and that helps a bit with greyscale smoothness, but I can't notice any meaningful change to max density.   (I suspect that grey scale optimizer chart will be added back to Proilfer 2.0 as a 'feature' when it is released, and we'll all have to shell out a $500 upgrade fee to get it!)

Would like to see some measurement of Dmax and how it was measured. Until then this is about blind guessing which shade of grey each of us talking about, yet assume were are all talking about the same shade. Also Dmax is just 1 (one) point in a gamut that one observes in its total behaviour (very large number of point if you like) when looking at a print.

[Ernst Dinkla]

Maybe a database with Dmax numbers for different papers could shed some light here or should I say make things less gray. There is still my plan to add Dmax / L-min numbers to SpectrumViz for up to 4 matte black and 4 gloss black inks. Two Epson desktop printers with 6 channels each are cleaned and prepared for that job. I made a conversion of the QTR partitioning target for this purpose. All I asked was to send me some near empty PK and MK carts of Canon and Epson wide formats, HP Vivera I have here. MIS Eboni etc and possibly Cone could be added. All I got was 1 near empty 3880 cart, thank you Peter.

In practice I have seen that profiling software usually cuts at Dmax compared to the best black sample in the calibration patches. To get the tone range correct in B&W with QTR tools for example has less impact.

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
April 2014, 600+ inkjet media white spectral plots.

[Ernst Dinkla]

i1Profiler, like Monaco Profiler before it neutralizes the grey axis all the way tot the black point, whereas PMP leaves the black point alone. So PMP will leave the black point at RGB=0,0,0 whereas MP and i1P might set the black point to RGB=0,23,8 to try and neutralize a magenta, yellowish cast. I've suggested that i1P give us the ability to choose between the two behaviors but I think that's wishful thinking. Neutralizing the black point is probably the right approach and a colorful black point represents a failure in the calibration process prior to profiling. All said I'll take the i1P results and exceptional Perceptual rendering anyway. Perceptually it is fantastic. If you have a beef with it the correct approach is to improve the calibration prior to profiling.

I doubt neutralizing the black point can actually be done as it will take way more color ink (cyan mainly) to get there than the coating can handle while Dmax then really would go down the drain.  It is always a compromise and the odd thing is that the higher the Dmax is there is less need to neutralize it, the color cast loses effect with less reflection. The compromise is where to let go of neutralization and at what rate. Best solution of course is more neutral gray-black inks. The HP Zs have an advantage there, at least the PK and Gray inks, the MK is not neutral either though but in the media presets that use MK, PK, Gray, Light Gray the PK can at least go a long way in the shadows. MIS (Image Specialist's) Eboni is actually the most neutral carbon matte black ink, still a bit warm. I do not think that the underlying paper white is a factor on the neutrality at good Dmax which is something else than observing the color contrast between white and black in a checkerboard image on OBA papers.

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
April 2014, 600+ inkjet media white spectral plots.

[JRSmit]

Ernst ,  near empty? I can send you my replaced epson 4900 mk and pk cartridges. What address?

[Ernst Dinkla]

Ernst ,  near empty? I can send you my replaced epson 4900 mk and pk cartridges. What address?

Is doorgegeven via je website. Merci.

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
April 2014, 600+ inkjet media white spectral plots.

[Erland]

Just came across this old thread. I have a Epson 1400 (dye ink) but have bought OCP 3rd party inks. They black is more bluish than the Epson OEM, and when I made my own profiles I lost a lot of depth, never got any real blacks. Very neutral though (Still going to optimize it). My profile was made in i1Profiler 1.5.6 with an i1Pro2. After reading this I exported my measurements and imported them into PM5, and made 2 profiles. One with neutral grey, and one with paper grey.
Measured the D-max on the i1P and the 2 different PM5 profiles I got the following:
i1P: 1,67 Dmax
PM Neutral grey: 1.53 Dmax
PM5 paper grey: 1.99 Dmax.

Since the OCP black has a colorcast, I am guessing using neutral grey in PM5, and i1P tries to neutralize it using different inks, and when going lower than this It can't correct it, and thus caps of as the blackest (neutral) black it can create. But using paper grey on an Epson lustre paper with and L104.1,a-0.2,b-4.1 it can create a deeper black since the paper is somewhat bluish also? Could this be correct?
Update: Measured the blackest black as lab 9.9, -0.7 -11.4.

On a real print the paper grey gives a better impression, with a better bottom and you can't really notice the not so neutral black.