Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: dgillilan on June 14, 2014, 02:00:48 pm
-
Hello,
Could someone point me to a resource to help understand when I do a "compare" of my newly created profile(say using a Canon ipf 6400 and Canon Pro Lustre 260 paper) to the canned Canon Pro Luster icc profile for my printer, when you see more color between two of the axes for the other profile, what does that mean and how can I better understand how to interpret this graph of comparison of the two profiles, I believe it shows lab values. I hate to say that I don't know much about lab values either. I do understand the RGB and up to 255, etc.
Any help appreciated.
Thank you,
Debra
-
You could examine how ColorThink (which IMHO is doing this much better and with far more useful data) plots the two gamuts:
http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/ColorThink_Pro_-_Grapher
-
Thanks Andrew, I did view and try to read over that link; I'm afraid it did not help me much with the problem I have, that link was very technical for other software.
Does anyone have other references that I can use for interpreting the comparison of print profiles in i1 software?
Thanks in advance, Debra
-
What you're viewing is technically complicated. And not shown to you as a user in this product with anything much that is useful. It's more X-rite eye candy if you will. You've got a gamut map but it's not presented very well or with much flexibility (and bigger doesn't necessary indicate better). IF you saw really weird shapes with abrupt changes in shape, it would indicate a bad profile (bad data) but you'd see that anyway the first time you soft proofed or converted the data. What ColorThink can do and show is vastly more complex yes, but vastly more useful. Even X-rite's older products (ProfileMaker Pro/MeasureTool) provide more useful feedback than this newer product.
-
Thanks Andrew, I saw a gamut shape that was about identical to the "canned" generic Canon profile for the same paper, using "Compare" in i1 software, wider slightly in some areas and maybe slimmer in others than the other color's shape. I will not stress over this, since I can also test as I've already done with my Hahnemuhle custom profile, to print same images, from two profiles and compare that way.
Thanks, Debra
-
In my opinion the best thing to do is rely on your own eyes and compare a good test print (either one that Andrew uses or the one that Jack Flesher did for the Outback website several years ago) and examine the color renditions. I've compared a lot of profiles using Argyll CMS tools and unless there is really a significant gamut difference tend to prefer the test print comparison since a well designed test print has the critical color regions incorporated into it.
-
Thanks Alan, I found his test prints as tiffs here, in case anyone else needs to use it besides me, I will use it:
http://outbackprint.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.html
And here is his explanation of how to use the test print to evaluate your print result:
http://outbackprint.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi049/essay.html
Debra
-
I test my profiles a few ways
I have a few test image sthat I will Assign the new profile to and look at the transitions.
I have created a test image, see attached. I print it with both profiles and let my eyes tell me what one is best. I look at the black squares in the left, bottom side to see which one has more shadow detail. I look at the gray balance and linearity, The smoothness of the transitions in the girls hair. The neutrality of the blacks. You can even go as far as to measure the blacks and see what one is more neutral. But in the end it is your eyes that you need to please. I can create a custom profile for a client and show him/her lots of gamut maps and numbers but in the end they always hold up the print and decide.
Angus Pady
-
Thanks Angus, I appreciate the help and your test image looks terrific with lots of areas to test and look at like you have said.
Thanks for the help,
Debra
-
What you're viewing is technically complicated. And not shown to you as a user in this product with anything much that is useful. It's more X-rite eye candy if you will. You've got a gamut map but it's not presented very well or with much flexibility (and bigger doesn't necessary indicate better). IF you saw really weird shapes with abrupt changes in shape, it would indicate a bad profile (bad data) but you'd see that anyway the first time you soft proofed or converted the data. What ColorThink can do and show is vastly more complex yes, but vastly more useful. Even X-rite's older products (ProfileMaker Pro/MeasureTool) provide more useful feedback than this newer product.
I have to agree with Andrew. If you're going to do your own profiles then I think the investment in time (and a bit of money) in using a tool like ColorThink (or GamutVision in my case) is really worthwhile. There can easily be problems in a profile that don't show up in a test image but which do in real life (see this, for example: http://www.gamutvision.com/docs/smudged_pines.html (http://www.gamutvision.com/docs/smudged_pines.html)). Also, these programs will give you all sorts of useful information about your printer/paper, like how things behave around the black point, how one paper compares with another, what happens when you print with different rendering intents, the effect of using different working spaces etc., etc.
GamutVision allows you to use the evaluation version for 20 tests (which means 20 times opening and closing the program, not viewing 20 different profiles), so you can really try it out before buying. The reason I didn't buy ColorThink is because I couldn't evaluate it properly (the evaluation version is hopelessly limited, IMO).
I do think a print is necessary for the final sign-off, but if the profile looks OK on GamutVision/ColorThink, then it's very unlikely it won't print properly. The gamut view on i1Profiler is better than nothing, but not much!
Robert
-
Don't know anything about Gamut Viewer (I don't think it will run on my Mac). But Colorthink provides tons more functionality than just plot gamuts. The ability to create and use ColorLists and plot them with or without profiles and images is very powerful. The vectors option is an amazing way to view differences in two sets of data. It's a tad buggy and a bit slow. It doesn’t get the love (updates) it should as it's a one man show in terms of programming and the Maxwell project (which is equally cool) has taken up a lot of resources. But it's indispensable for color geeks.
-
Thank you Robert and Andrew, i will look into the two software products that you suggested and study the need and output results that they offer,
Debra
-
Don't know anything about Gamut Viewer (I don't think it will run on my Mac).
It's Gamutvision http://www.gamutvision.com/ (http://www.gamutvision.com/) (not Gamut Viewer) ... and like ColorThink Pro it does a lot more than viewing gamuts. It will run on the Mac, but requires Virtual PC 6 or 7. I haven't done a feature comparison between ColorThink Pro and Gamutvision, but one thing that certainly stands out is the price ($99 for Gamutvision versus $399 for ColorThink Pro).
Robert
-
Hi Robert,
Yes, I have done some research and the price difference is there. And Gamutvision does offer a better price($99), compared to ColorThink Pro at $149 and $400- pro.
I see on the Gamutvision demo page that you are absolutely correct, I will have 20 comparison demo tests and that is it, as far as trying it out.
My question to you, if you can offer more advice: What should I have ready in terms of my assets, if you will, of profiles, to try this out? I guess I need to read over the installation and tutorials first, before I do the trial. I have time, I am in no rush.
As you said, as long as I have already made a huge investment in a pro level spectro, I should continue and get the correct evaluation-type software of the custom profiles.
I do have three different profiles of my Museo Max paper(two of which I developed, one with the now-non functioning SpyderPRint colorimeter that i need to recycle somewhere, one with my new Xrite i1 pro spectro, and one from Museo Max, canned). I think I also have three of my Innova Soft Texture and two of my Hahnemuhle paper.
So Those would be three "sets", if you will, to use as three of the twenty "demo" opportunities.
Is that what I would need to "try out" the software, or what would you recommend to give it a try?
Thank you for your time,
Debra