Started by Scott Martin, April 11, 2012, 09:24:33 am
Quote from: Nigel Johnson on April 15, 2012, 03:02:39 pmAccording to the X-Rite site and downloaded brochure, i1Basic Pro 2 (the 'hardware only' upgrade) does not include the ColorChecker Proof or ColorChecker Classic (mini) although they were included as part of the i1Publish software upgrade.
Quote from: MHMG on April 15, 2012, 01:01:38 pm Also, I've always felt that the original rationale for scrambling which was based on the notion of averaging out printer inconsistency and non-uniformity is kind of a circular argument since printers that show those problems often aren't worth profiling, IMHO. cheers,Markhttp://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
Quote from: digitaldog on April 15, 2012, 01:11:33 pmAlso consider the optimization process for grays alone:http://www.i1upgrades.com/2011/08/how-to-use-the-tc-2502-gray-optimization-chart/On my Epson printers, I do see an improvement (Roman 16 neutral test images) both in neutrality and smoothness of gradients.
Quote from: digitaldog on April 15, 2012, 12:12:24 pmI still think it would be nice if i1Profiler (like Bill and your targets), were 16-bit for those that do.
Quote from: Mark Paulson on April 15, 2012, 08:41:43 pmI would like a copy, but I am confused. Does the original profile have to have the same number of patches?
Quote from: aaronchan on April 15, 2012, 11:20:20 pmWould you send me a copy as well?I've tried the 2 thousand whatever one and it didn't work.
Quote from: Onsight on April 16, 2012, 09:32:26 amCan I ask you, how many gray patches did your initial target contain? Optimization was designed for low patch count target like those used with the Munki.
Quote from: ThDo on April 16, 2012, 01:28:18 amYou already have them - either as part of i1 Photo Pro or i1 Publish Pro or the iProfiler upgrade package A or B or iProfiler software only.That are the only ways you can already have a working iProfiler printing module license.
Quote from: digitaldog on April 16, 2012, 09:46:56 amI'm not sure, I'll have to look but not anything like 2500 <g>As you know from another forum, I've been a critic of the optimization process until I tried Marc's target and applied it to profiles I've built using 1700 odd plus patches. I've yet to see optimization do anything useful expect for low patch initial Munki-like targets with color patches in optimization. With 2500 gray patches, I do see improvement in neutrals and their gradients being smoother but it isn't huge.
Quote from: Jalok on April 17, 2012, 04:57:37 pmI've seen improvement not only in neutrals and gradients but also in Dmax of the darkest neutral tone. Also, to see those improvements it was not needed to apply the huge Marcs' target, but a simple 400-500 patch optimization target plus "roman16_16_lowkey_BW_rgb" tones.
Quote from: Onsight on April 17, 2012, 05:01:09 pmOK, so how many patches and neutral patches did *your* original target have?
Quote from: Mark Paulson on April 17, 2012, 05:38:55 pmOk I give. What the heck is a "roman16_16_lowkey_BW_rgb" ?
Quote from: Onsight on April 17, 2012, 05:31:16 pmA 2052 only has 18 gray axis patches. I'd suggest starting with a target that contains a ton of gray axis patches. 2033 for example, contains well over 100 gray patches and will, IMO produce a better profile to start with, potentially limiting the benefit of optimization.Again, I'd rather start with a smart target containing tons of gray patches than have to optimize it with a second step.
Quote from: Jalok on April 18, 2012, 04:17:55 pmI never thought this would make any difference,...
Quote from: Jalok on April 18, 2012, 04:17:55 pmI will try to reprofile a given paper using the 2033-patch targets and compare the results to the one archieved with the original 2052-patch targets plus optimization.
QuoteA 2052 only has 18 gray axis patches. I'd suggest starting with a target that contains a ton of gray axis patches. 2033 for example, contains well over 100 gray patches
Quote from: jwlimages on April 20, 2012, 01:34:24 pmSorry if I sound cranky. I genuinely want to learn more about how best to use this software.
Quote from: jwlimages on April 20, 2012, 01:34:24 pmhow does one find out this kind of information?
Quote from: jwlimages on April 20, 2012, 01:34:24 pmWithout any documentation from X-rite, what does the user do - go through patch sets incrementing the total # one at a time, saving out tiffs & using Photoshop to count how many patches are close to "gray" values?!
Quote from: jwlimages on April 20, 2012, 01:34:24 pmIs there some logic to why a 2033-patch count has more than 5X the gray axis patches than another target generated with #19 additional patches total? If so, is this published somewhere?
Page created in 0.025 seconds with 15 queries.