I could supply two printer profiles so anyone who can't alter the internal names of a profile can over-ride the "Use ACPU" warning dialog.
Looks like this is a necessary step as I measured a target printed by canceling the dialog in
Print when source and destination is the same, compared it to ACPU. Both targets dried over night. Way off (mostly in blues). Seems for the hack to work, one needs to have two profiles that are identical expect for their internal names so Print '
converts' from source to destination with a null condition. Here's the report:
--------------------------------------------------
dE Report
Number of Samples: 918
Delta-E Formula dE2000
Overall - (918 colors)
--------------------------------------------------
Average dE: 3.34
Max dE: 19.73 Min dE: 0.06
StdDev dE: 2.20
Best 90% - (825 colors)
--------------------------------------------------
Average dE: 2.80
Max dE: 5.10
Min dE: 0.06
StdDev dE: 1.10
Worst 10% - (93 colors)
--------------------------------------------------
Average dE: 8.15
Max dE: 19.73
Min dE: 5.13
StdDev dE: 3.36
--------------------------------------------------
Here is a report from prints made yesterday, measured today (dry down) using ACPU and the
proper Photoshop Hack using two profiles:
--------------------------------------------------
dE Report
Number of Samples: 918
Delta-E Formula dE2000
Overall - (918 colors)
--------------------------------------------------
Average dE: 0.18
Max dE: 0.70 Min dE: 0.01
StdDev dE: 0.10
Best 90% - (825 colors)
--------------------------------------------------
Average dE: 0.16
Max dE: 0.31
Min dE: 0.01
StdDev dE: 0.07
Worst 10% - (93 colors)
--------------------------------------------------
Average dE: 0.39
Max dE: 0.70
Min dE: 0.31
StdDev dE: 0.08
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
So, you really,
really have to use PS (CC2014) to print untagged targets? It has to behave just like ACPU (and i1P)? The dE report above illustrates it's doable. An Average dE: 0.18 is what' I'd expect to see from the iSis measuring two different printed targets.