ICC implementation in ImagePrint - Question from Quentin.
ICC implementation in ImagePrint - Question from Quentin.
- Subject: ICC implementation in ImagePrint - Question from Quentin.
- From: Nick Wheeler <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 11:35:01 -0500
Quentin Wrote:
>
While MonacoProof gives excellent results, the ImagePrint profiler would offer
>
the choice of profiling for daylight or tungsten to maximise accuracy.
>
Hello all:
You can create printer profiles for any illuminant specification you like
with the latest version of ProfileMaker.
I have finally determined that to prevent a mode conversion in IP, input
images MUST BE UNTAGGED as well as all source space defaults set to NONE.
This is not clearly documented at the moment. A tagged image will always
result in a mode conversion in IP. I created some new profiles for IP
yesterday for Epson Smooth Fine Art paper which worked well.
Due to the "lighter and less saturated" issue that Quentin and others have
noticed about mode conversions in IP, I tried the mode conversion in
PhotoShop as well. The conversion is more successful when made in PhotoShop
and the resultant file (left untagged) is sent on to IP for printing. I did
notice the lighter and less saturated problem when doing the mode conversion
in IP. I will bet anything that this has been fixed in more recent
iterations of IP than the one I am using.
I did my profiles in RGB, but I can imagine CMYK profiles could work just as
well if not better. I have not tested this as yet but intend to. I imagine
that relative success in RGB and CMYK is testchart and profiling package
depenadant. It would be nice to be able to edit in either colorspace on
occaision.
I think most of the confusion about how color management is handled in IP
can be explained by the image tagging issue, the fact that IP does not call
colorsync (so all profiles must be stored in the "Color" folder in IP as
well as in your colorsync profiles folder, this because the app was
originally developed for the PC platform) and this:
>
on 1/30/03 11:07 AM, John Pannozzo wrote:
>
>
> Hi Nick,
>
>
>
> I have been following some debate on how to profile ImagePrint and the
>
> allusion that we are doing something non standard. ImagePrint is 100% ICC
>
> compatible and when you turn off our color management it is truly off. When
>
> the color management is off what is left is what we call the recipe. I think
>
> what is confusing people in building a custom profile is something that we do
>
> to support older profilers. I'll explain.
>
>
>
> The ICC specification only has a standard for Relative Colorimetric data.
>
> Each profiler manufacturer therefore creates a perceptual table based on
>
> there own abilities. When we first created ImagePrint the perceptual tables
>
> being created by the profiling software on the market was really bad. To
>
> allow people to continue to use these packages we put a feature in ImagePrint
>
> that would ignore the perceptual table in the profile and generate a new one
>
> from the relative colorimetric data. We did this for any profile that was
>
> not our own.
>
>
>
> Now what is happening is that the new versions of these profilers have
>
> changed the way they do things. Some only put in perceptual tables while
>
> others give you an option. For those that only put in perceptual data, the
>
> profile would not work in IP. We have recently changed this in the PC
>
> version and the next OS X version (within days) will also have this fix. With
>
> the fix any third party profile should work fine.
>
>
>
>
>
> John
>
>
What John calls the recipe is what I refer to as linearization, although it
is important to realize it is more than that. Inside the recipe is not only
linearization, but also proper black generation and color crossover curves.
This "recipe" and their superb screening is the holy grail as far as I am
concerned, and well worth the 1500.00 I have to spend for it. You also have
additional control over the linearization through the ink limiting tool box.
These printers without decent software to drive them are really pretty
useless - sort of like a computer without an operating system or application
software. So when making a purchasing decision it is important to keep in
mind the cost of driver software as well (not to mention consumables and the
like).
I agree with Andrew Rodney that it would be a waste of time for Colorbyte to
devote any time to an IP profiling package, there are plenty of other good
ones out there. Also the yearly maintenance contract would supply unlimited
profiles to those that need this type of thing. For the rest of us there are
countless profiles available for free from ColorByte's web site.
I would love to see Colorbyte work on a densitometer based linearization
process that would tweak the ink limits for day to day process control!!
Best wishes,
Nick Wheeler
_______________________________________________
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.