Re: Agfa Sherpa & Epson 10600 proofing dilemma
Re: Agfa Sherpa & Epson 10600 proofing dilemma
- Subject: Re: Agfa Sherpa & Epson 10600 proofing dilemma
- From: neil_snape <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:43:37 +0200
Title: Re: Agfa Sherpa & Epson 10600 proofing dilemma
on 28/10/2004 17:47, Nick Virgilio wrote :
> Equipment:
> I use a mac running OS9 with PMP 4 with eye-one to create my profiles. My
> monitor has been calibrated many times using 6500K, 2.2gamma with a current
> lightness of 88, I just redid the calibration. Our printer is the Epson
> 10600UC, rip is Best Remote Proof XXL using Best semi-matte paper 9180.
The 9180 paper will not show well in most light boxes at 6500 monitor white point. Try a custom white point on your monitor to between 5200-5800 and visually match your media white in the viewing booth to the monitor white point.
> History:
> We have done all of our own baselin and paper profile measurements for the
> Best 9180 paper with the eye-one. I have profiled the Sherpa using the two
> page charts "ECI2002 CMYK i1 1_2.tiff". I have plugged this profile into
> the rip as the reference profile and into Photoshop as the proof setup. My
> color settings are set to US Sheetfed Coated v2. I get an almost perfect
> onscreen soft proof in photoshop 7 with my proofer.
The media profile is the paper profile, not the reference. The reference profile is the press profile. When you linearise , try to cut the inks back to represent more or less press densities. Do not try to maintain max densities otherwise you'll have a tougher time hitting the press simulation.
> Problem:
> When the same CMYK file is printed on the Sherpa it is way off. I have
> tried sending both proofers files that have embedded US sheetfed coated v2
> profile, the AGFA Sherpa profile and no embedded profile at all (like the
> test charts have) and they all look identical, none of that makes any
> difference, my proof does not match their proof. All files are CMYK so
> there is no RGB-CMYK conversion in the rips. I do not think this calls for
> profile editor as I get a "perfect" soft proof. I have looked at this
> Sherpa profile and US Sheetfed Coated profile in color eidtor's 3d mapping
> and both profiles are very similar with their own minor peaks in different
> places.
>
> I am at a loss, I cannot see where the problem lies.
Profiles mapping can appear similar yet in no way does it mean the tables needed to get the colors there are similar.
Why don't you put the Sherpa's profile as reference and your Epson as paper profile and see what that does.
--
Neil Snape photographer Paris France email@hidden http://www.neilsnape.com
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden