What if you did a better soft proof on one paper than another? Am I missing something about using color test prints?
When you talk about "soft proofing" - what you mean exactly?
A) Watching a simulation of the printed result on the screen (after choosing proper rendering intent and icc profile), or
B) while doing A), tweaking the original RGB image to "optimize" the simulated result?
I assume we talk about B), am I right?
When I started printing some years ago, I believed: "Proper color management delivers a print as close as possible to the original RGB file (according to the given ink/printer/paper combination). A) should be enough.
But today, I believe: The mathematics of ICC color management are good, but not good enough to describe all physical and psychological processes
happening inside your eyes and brain when you look at a print. Not to speak of the differences between you and some other person.
Today, I think B) is where the "art" or "craft" of fine art printing comes in: You think about presentation and lighting, framing, glazing, which again leads to paper/ink/printer choices. Depending on taste and/or experience, you tweak rgb values, saturation and/or contrast, open shadows, adapt three quarter tones in relationship to paper colour, make test prints...
And finally you get a master print (or not 😉).
Discussions with numerous color management "gurus" and lurking at LuLa seem to prove me right: A) is not enough, B) can not be done mathematically and is an act of art/craft.
What do you think about that?