Re: Iris IQ/Pro 5.0 ICC Setup frustrations.....
Re: Iris IQ/Pro 5.0 ICC Setup frustrations.....
- Subject: Re: Iris IQ/Pro 5.0 ICC Setup frustrations.....
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 10:52:22 +0100
Terry,
maybe your problem is similar to my experience with IQ/MacPro 4.0.1.
I'm also using the ICC setup (with a self-defined baseline). Source
profiles are from our presses, Iris profile is for the Semimatte Pro
material. I compared prints of test images with proofs on Iris2Print,
Epson 5000 (Best 4.6.1, Semimatte 9180 paper), and various monitors.
The Iris ones have a slight cast, the others are good.
Even if there are no optical brighteners in the Semimatte Pro paper,
I thought something might be wrong with the media white point of the
Iris profile. Changed it but found no response. Changed more, again
nothing. On the other hand, the wtpt of the press profile works.
It appears that in abscol conversions, the source wtpt is used but
the destination is not. (However, Best and Photoshop work correctly
and show a change with the different paper white point profiles.)
The semimatte media is slightly greenish, and the proofs appear too cold.
This is what one might expect if the paper color is not considered.
Terry, perhaps your paper has also a slight cast?
We then upgraded from Colorsync 2.6.1 to 3.0.4, no change.
I created device links with ColorBlind Edit and Chromix ColorThink
on the same machine that is running IQ/MacPro, using various CMMs.
The device link has no white point anymore and should give different
output CMYK values for different destination paper whites.
But it doesn't! Not only is the Iris output with device links unchanged
from the previous tests, but also when I'm feeding CMYK values into the
device link A2B0 table, I get the same results.
So maybe the problem is outside of IQ/MacPro and inside of Colorsync
instead. (I didn't yet try it on another mac...)
Comments, anyone?
Hanno
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:40:25, Terry Wyse <email@hidden> wrote:
>
Frustrating experience #2 for this past week:
>
>
Tried implementing an ICC profile/ColorSync workflow for an Iris Realist
>
5015 and an Iris4Print both running IQ/Pro 5.0 RIP software. The
procedure
>
goes something like:
>
>
1) Print profiling target using one of the "Iris Linear" Color Setups.
>
2) Measure and build profile.
>
3) Plug your "Iris" (destination) profile and "Target"
(source/simulation)
>
profile into their ICC Setup preferences, select a rendering intent
(AbsCol
>
in this case) and setting the default Color Setup the same as what you
used
>
to print your target.
>
4) Print your proof.
>
5) Perfect proof print. NOT!
>
>
The results were far off from my Fuji ColorArt proof I was using as a
>
reference (yes, I made a profile from this same proof and used this as my
>
"target" simulation). The proof had a too-strong paper white tint and the
>
shadows were very flat although the amount of visible shadow detail was
>
about right. It almost looked like a CMY-only separation but examining
with
>
a loupe you could see that there was indeed black ink being laid down.
>
>
Here's the strange thing:
>
I set up the same conversion in Photoshop 7 using AbsCol and the AppleCMM
>
and printed this with profiles disabled on the Iris but using the same
Color
>
Setup as I used for my profiling target. Guess what? The Photoshop
converted
>
image looked nearly perfect as compared to the one printed through the
>
IQ/Pro profile conversion. So have I "uncovered" some sort of bug with
the
>
Iris ICC profile setup?
>
>
For the record, we did try upgrading the version of ColorSync on the Mac
>
from 3.0 to 3.0.3 and tried forcing the CMM (tried Apple and Heidelberg)
>
that was used instead of "Automatic". Nothing helped. A call to the
>
Creo/Scitex help desk confirmed that we were doing everything correctly.
>
>
Mac RIP was an older beige G3, OS 9.04, ColorSync 3.0.3.
>
>
Cheers,
>
Terry
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.