Re: Epson canned profiles
Re: Epson canned profiles
- Subject: Re: Epson canned profiles
- From: G Mike Adams <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 11:46:22 -0500
Ben,
Y’know my granddaughter has this saying that she uses whenever two people start
arguing. It starts, “Ladies, you’re both beautiful…” and it’s gotten to be a
family touchstone that everyone uses at the start of an argument.
So… Ladies, you’re both beautiful.
I think everyone here gets your point, and Andrew’s as well.
Yes, there are situations which are as critical as you describe.
So?
Anyone in this situations should be using a RIP, and should not be using canned
profiles in any event.
There are also lots of people who buy printers and make prints and have very
little understanding of resolutions and mechanical settings, and for those
people one-size-fits-all canned profiles that work with all of the above with
a .85 dE ain't bad at all.
Mike Adams
Correct Color
> On Apr 17, 2018, at 11:15 AM, ben <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Apr 17, 2018, at 6:02 AM, email@hidden wrote:
>
>> If you inhabit the "dE differences of .85 at the 6ish L value level make no
>> difference”-world then it does not discount all the people who that would
>> make a huge difference to.
>
> I've avoided getting into _why_ Andrew is spouting nonsense about the
> supposed insignificance of 0.85 dE because I couldn't even get him to put any
> actual data to his claims, but I think it's very much worthwhile having a
> side discussion on that point.
>
> Yes, Put a pair of patches side-by-side that differ by 0.85 dE and most
> people would be very, very hard pressed to tell you which is which. Separate
> the patches by even a small amount of space and zero humans will do better
> than a coin flip to tell you which is darker / more saturated / whatever.
>
> ...but that's not the only context in which humans are exposed to relative
> color difference. It's not even remotely the most significant context,
> especially with respect to profile building.
>
> First is that we're especially sensitive to changes in hue near the neutral
> axis. Make that 0.85 dE a comparison between L*a*b* 50, 0, -0.43 and 50, 0,
> +0.43, and a *LOT* more people will be able to tell you that the one patch is
> a bit warmer and the other a bit cooler. But a 0.85 dE between two points on
> the spectrum locus and low brightness? Toss a coin.
>
> But even more important, especially with respect to profiling, is that you
> can pick basically any pair of colors that differ by 0.85 dE, place them
> adjacent to each other with no space separation, and the line dividing them
> will be instantly visible to everybody. You might not be able to describe the
> difference, but that there's a line between them will be obvious.
>
> Which is why we don't use seven-bit color.
>
> I would hope that everybody here is well familiar with how easy it is to see
> banding in eight-bit gradients. Banding in a seven-bit gradient is far more
> glaring -- and the difference between steps in a seven-bit gradient is a mere
> 0.78 dE.
>
> So Andrew's blather about how a difference of 0.85 dE in profile building is
> invisibly meaningless is exactly equivalent to a claim that 7-bit imaging
> ought to be good enough for anybody, and his pouting that you can't identify
> the difference between 0.85 dE samples is irrelevant.
>
> It further illustrates a very disturbing shortsightedness on Andrew's part.
> Profiles can be used for spot color matching, yes, but that seems to be the
> Alpha and Omega of Andrew's goal in profile building. For everybody who's not
> printing corporate brochures where the company logo has to be the right
> Pantone number, profiling is all about image quality, especially fine detail.
> Open shadows and clear highlights in black-and-white fine art; smooth (and
> natural) skin tones in fashion and portraiture; that sort of thing.
>
> Missing the black point by 0.85 dE might not be as big a deal for a printer
> as well linearized as the new Epsons appear to be, but that would be entirely
> thanks to Epson engineers. Indeed, I wouldn't at all be surprised if you'd
> get more detail from a matrix profile than from one made the way Andrew's
> been describing.
>
> ...which is why context is so important. Miss some super-saturated yellow by
> 0.85 dE and nobody will care. Miss the black point by 0.85 dE and some will.
> Miss the black point by 0.85 dE in one direction, the midpoint by 0.85 dE in
> another, and the white point by another 0.85 in yet another direction, and
> you've got a serious problem.
>
> Then again, Andrew has repeatedly repudiated his own data, so who knows what
> he's actually doing?
>
> Cheers,
>
> b&
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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