Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Mike Sellers on May 15, 2015, 12:16:43 pm
-
Should I be profiling with perceptual or relative rendering intent?
Mike
-
I always use relative intent unless working with matte ink.
Paul
-
I always use relative intent unless working with matte ink.
Paul
BS
Brian A
-
Should I be profiling with perceptual or relative rendering intent?
Mike
I take it you are talking about using a profile to print, not creating a profile?
It is subjective. IMHO, if there are no colors out of gamut, then unless perceptual gives you a more 'pleasing' print, the default rendering intent should be relative colorimetric.
If you have out-of-gamut colors in your image, then you need to make a choice over what you want to achieve.
A perceptual rendering intent will sift in-gamut colors, even if there are no colors in your image that are out of gamut.
Brian A
-
BS
Brian A
Please explain? BS? basically your answer is the same as mine. Relative intent or Relative colormetric will always be the first choice. However with matte ink, most times I find this blocks shadows so I use perceptual.
Paul
-
Should I be profiling with perceptual or relative rendering intent?
Mike
Do you mean creating a profile for a particular paper and ink or selecting a rendering intent for printing?
-
Profiles don't know anything about color in context, only how individual pixel values should map numerically. You have to view differing rendering intents and pick the one you prefer visually. There is no standard in how a perceptual rendering intent is produced. It has to be pleasing to whoever designs it for you. So, soft proof, select the various RI's available and pick the one you visually prefer per image.
-
Please explain? BS? basically your answer is the same as mine. Relative intent or Relative colormetric will always be the first choice. However with matte ink, most times I find this blocks shadows so I use perceptual.
My apologies, a late Friday night/early Saturday morning comment.
But I don't see PK/MK being a determining factor in decisions of which rendering intent to use. I see no more problems with blocked shadows using relative colorimetric (with BPC) than with perceptual when using matte papers.
Brian A
-
No apology needed, I was just confused by the quote. I have always had this problem with matte ink, more so with canvas prints than matte paper.
This is on a epson, using the Driver and printing from LR or CC.
With a matte print many times I see a big loss in shadow details in the blacks, they just block up, if I use the relative colormetric intent. You won't see it in a softproof, only in the print, but it's very clear. By moving to Perceptual and working shadows a bit in LR, I can get an acceptable print most of the time.
However, same print, no push done in LR, if I go to a PK ink and a glossy or semi gloss paper or canvas the difference in shadows is most impressive, and the relative intent works better here.
I have tried both Epson profiles, Canson Profiles, my own profiles made with i1 and latest software and I still have the issues with MK ink on matte canvas or paper.
Paul
-
Use very little canvas, and then almost always Innova Ultra Gloss, which isn't ultra glossy, more similar to a lustre paper.
I used to have blocking problems with Hahnemühle Photo Rag 308, but mostly with dark greens muddying. I see very little blocking with Canson Rag Photographique 310 or the slightly whiter 210. I do flip between intents when soft proofing, but generally only go with perceptual if large areas are out of gamut and the clipping of relative colorimetric would cause saturated colors to block up.
I also don't have any great loss of shadow detail with Hahnemühle German Etching, Arches Aquarelle, Breathing Color Pura Velvet, but rarely use those for low key images.
Brian A