Re: Monaco vs. Gretag Neutrals Analysis
Re: Monaco vs. Gretag Neutrals Analysis
- Subject: Re: Monaco vs. Gretag Neutrals Analysis
- From: Dan Reid <email@hidden>
- Date: 05 Jan 2006 09:11:21 -0800
- Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:58:21 -0700
Title: Re: Monaco vs. Gretag Neutrals Analysis
on 1/4/06 10:46 PM, Michael Fox Photography News Account at email@hidden wrote:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for the response. Yeah, I guess I’m a glutton. Don’t really have the time but I sure am learning a lot!
Actually, what you describe below regarding the RIP total ink limit setting isn’t the problem. The total ink limit in the RIP is typically very high (on the order of 360 or above) while the ideal TAC in the profile tends to be in the range of 250-300 (depending on the paper, of course). So the RIP total ink limit never comes into play in the profiles I’m building in the 250-300 range. It’s a good point to watch out for, but not the problem in this case.
I will try turning off the “intelligent” black option to see if that helps. If it stops the “not so intelligent drop-outs towards L*=0,” as you say, then I’ll be very, very happy. Thanks for that.
Well the profiling app is telling you have too much ink which is why it’s building it at much less than your RIP ink limit. You may look at reducing your ink limit at the RIP and you might find the shadow reversals (too much ink) go away. 360% is a lot of ink on paper so you must either A) have a super coated stock and/or B) not using a high printer resolution which would put down twice as much ink.
I determine the sweet spot for RIP ink limit by evaluating different ink limit settings in ColorShop X. Look for the darkest L* and that’s where you should set your ink limit. Use the same ink limit setting in reducing your profiling chart ink coverage.
- Dan
Hey Michael,
Boy you are a glutton for punishment and have too much time on your hands to try all these permutations. That said, it’s nice to explore and learn the hard way!
I can tell you this short and sweet that your TAC (total area coverage) aka TIL (Total ink limit) is a big factor. You can determine the TAC sweet spot by measuring in ColorPort and importing to ColorshopX to determine which setting offers the darkest L* value.
Say it’s 260% coverage for arguments sake. It would make a whole lot of sense to NOT send a profiling chart with more than 260 ink coverage otherwise the RIP guardians of ink limit will cut back the profiling charts values to meet no more than 260% (that’s what they are supposed to do, right?). So sending a 400% profiling chart to a RIP with a 260% would not be such a great idea.
You’ll find that MonacoProfiler easily allows you to modify TAC settings for profiling charts prior to saving them out. In ProfileMaker you’ll have take a trip to MeasureTool to create a new target with the desired ink limiting.
You might be surprised by the results you get then. BTW this will HUGELY affect black generation in the profiling application, aka neutrals.
Also try disabling “intelligent black” in MonacoProfiler and you’ll see the not so intelligent drop-outs towards L*0 go away. :) Actually they are not soo soo bad but it definitely defies most sound reasoning.
Have fun!
--
Dan B. Reid
RPImaging
Color Management Products & Training for Print, Internet, & Motion Graphics
http://www.rpimaging.com | Toll Free: (866) RGB-CMYK
_______________________________________________
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