January 2018 - colorsync-users

Re: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible?
by Keith Cooper 15 Jan '18

15 Jan '18

> Keith Cooper wrote: >> An interesting discussion that likely relates to an issue I've seen in >> printing B&W photos. >> >> This from a qualitative POV... >> >> In using either B&W print modes (ABW or Canon) or icc profiles there is >> frequently a tendency to crunch deep shadow detail in varying amounts for >> images on a wide range of papers. > > The normal explanation for this using ICC profiles, is using a colorimetric > intent with an idealized source colorspace (i.e. sRGB, AdobeRGB, ProPhoto), > since then all input values below the black point of the printer will be > clipped. > > Typical fixes are BPC or a correctly gamut mapped output profile > using perceptual intent, or the equivalent device link workflow. > > Whether this explanation is applicable to your situation is something > you will have to explain, since it very much depends on technical > details of your workflow. > > Graeme Gill. Thanks Graeme - I was looking for a relatively simple solution that could apply to printing a monochrome image (e.g. 16 bit B&W photo in GG2.2) from Photoshop using the relevant Canon or Epson driver (oh, and on a Mac since I don't have any PCs here to try) - I say relatively simple, since I'd like it to be something that I could share with non printing/colour management experts - Let's say I've got a PRO-2000 and a P7000 in my office. Let's assume I want to use two different papers, one a heavy lustre baryta type (pk ink) and one a heavy cotton rag (mk ink) I could use Epson ABW or Canon's B&W print mode, but they have limited controls. Still they can work well for some images on some papers. One approach would be to use a normal profile (say from i1Profiler, since I have a copy) with or without BPC as looked best for the paper and RI Doing this can make for some good looking prints, but is where I notice the tendency to crunch shadows, which led to my initial query. This is where I noticed your mention of: "a correctly gamut mapped output profile using perceptual intent". Could my 'shadow crunching' be a result of this not happening with my i1Profiler profile, for a B&W source image? I know the 'limited nature' of the adjustment sliders in i1Profiler has been a matter of concern in some previous discussions here ;-) I'm well aware of the need to allow for media colour and the darkest blacks being not quite black (I did say I was looking from a qualitative POV) but the shadows crunch is often enough to need to expand them a bit (in PS) before printing. I'd rather that this was not needed. Any other suggestions for printing a B&W photo from Photoshop with the normal OEM driver would be welcome. Note specifically 'from Photoshop', not via some extra print software. I've used TrueBW on Canons for example and also looked at QuadToneRIP. Both these have specific linearisation options for dealing with the issue I'd noticed, but as I said I was looking for a possible simple approach for the photographer just printing B&W photos from Photoshop (or LR, but I don't use it) Bye for now Keith Cooper

2 1

Re: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible?
by Keith Cooper 07 Jan '18

07 Jan '18

An interesting discussion that likely relates to an issue I've seen in printing B&W photos. This from a qualitative POV... In using either B&W print modes (ABW or Canon) or icc profiles there is frequently a tendency to crunch deep shadow detail in varying amounts for images on a wide range of papers. Adding a simple hand built 'reverse' tone curve in PS can often even things out, but it would be nice to find a profiling solution that could (if desired) help deliver a more linear looking print from darkest to lightest for a particular paper/inkset. Why bother? I feel it could give a more consistent starting point for editing and printing B&W photos. It's also a question I get asked quite often (indirectly) by photographers trying to print their B&W photography. X-Rite recently added B&W icc options to i1Profiler when they produced the i1Studio version of the software for the ColorMunki. I had hoped that these profiles might show some attention to the non linearity issues I see, but they do not. Bye for now Keith Cooper Northlight Images

4 3

RE: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible?
by Roger Breton 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

I still have a couple of BabelColor White references. Nothing comes close to their usefulness -- and prices. Almost L*100. Best / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Ernst Dinkla Sent: Saturday, January 6, 2018 6:39 AM To: Ben Goren <ben(a)trumpetpower.com> Cc: 'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible? On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 10:32 PM, Ben Goren <ben(a)trumpetpower.com> wrote: > On Jan 5, 2018, at 1:52 PM, forums(a)walkerblackwell.com wrote: > > > All other things can go where they go for now. If the print is near > > the > sun I’m fine with it blinding me, if the print is in shadow I’m fine > with it looking too dark. But linear printed L* values (percentage of > reflected > light) related to a TILE WHITE of a spectro is what I’m after. > > First...it's really important to understand that L* values are _not_ > the percentage of reflected light. L* values (ideally but not > actually) represent 100 perceptually-equal step wedges between > absolute black (*NOT* dMax, but an actual absence of light) and a > perfect lambertian reflector (of which, again, PTFE thread tape is an > astonishingly good approximation) under close-to-typical illumination. > > You're familiar, I hope, with the famous Kodak 18% gray card? It > reflects (within manufacturing tolerances, which are pretty broad) 18% > of incident light. > > Plop your spectrometer on it, and it'll give you a D50 Lab reading of > L*=50, a*=0, b*=0...plus or minus at least five units (did I mention > manufacturing tolerances?). > Meanwhile there are some OBA free inkjet papers, satin finish, that come close to the white reflectance of PTFE thread tape (12mm wide, 9mm high stack, Lab 98.9 0.0 0.5) Lab 98.8 0.0 0.9 for Arca Proline Vibrant Superior FineArt Rag satin 300 gsm, Lab 98.8 -0.2 1.8 for Inkpress Baryta 307 gsm. White museum board underneath the samples. Over the last decade there has been quite a gain in paper white reflectance of inkjet papers without using OBA whitening agents. For the dynamic range (in practice) it actually is more important than Dmax improvements. OBA free papers improve much to better color constancy in changing light conditions. For inkjet inks the HP Z models have a Photo Black for gloss papers that is near neutral, the same for the grey inks in some of the Z models. Fading to a warmer black in time is minimal. The Matte Black ink is right away warmer though. Of the plain carbon pigment based matte black inks the latest version of the Eboni black inks (MIS) is the most neutral but like all carbon pigments a bit warm. That said for most humans neutral is still warm, one wonders what that respons would have been if OBA never had been used in any product. Pity that there is no PTFE thread tape in a grey quality that is as inexpensive, neutral and fade resistant as the white version. As a white reference / gray card the PTFE thread tape has limited use being near Lab 100. I went through several grey plastic samples to find near neutral ones for that purpose, they exist with numbers not beyond Delta E* 0.8 from neutral and are less prone to shift in time due to filth or fading than the normal grey cards. Various inexpensive products intended to be neutrally colored are made in higher quantities and more batches than the special tiles (ceramic, BaSO4, PTFE) for optical measurements, the deviations will be higher but a nice (not UV cut) spectrometer can be a godsend then. Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm July 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. colorsync-users mailing list (colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/graxx%40videotron.ca This email sent to graxx(a)videotron.ca

2 1

RE: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible?
by Roger Breton 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

> I guess my question is, has anyone found a scientifically consistent way to get around this “appearance” match and simply set the output conditions for linear? I have not seen > or read this as an explicit workflow in my research . . . As others have aptly indicated already, there is no such thing as a way to get around "appearance" in ICC/CIE color matching. Have you found what you were looking for already or are you still pursuing your experiments? Best / Roger

1 0

Re: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible?
by Ben Goren 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

On Jan 5, 2018, at 12:18 PM, forums(a)walkerblackwell.com wrote: > I’m not looking for a visual match. That’s what normal ICCs do. > > [...] > > Let’e say our dMax is L* 14.45 on Matte Paper and our dMin (paper white) is L* 96.5 ...but that's the problem! L* _is_ visual! That's the entire point of the definition. The math has grown much more sophisticated in recent refinements, but the basic "unit" of L* is designed to be the minimum humanly-perceptible difference between two samples -- and it just happens that there's "close enough" to 100 such "units" in typical viewing environments that the standard was defined as such. L* is an entirely _perceptual_ measure, and only becomes absolute when coupled with viewing conditions. As in...D65 L*=100, a*=0, b*=0 is a very noticeably bluer color than D50 L*=100, a*=0, b*=0. Both D50 and D65 are defined with certain illumination (brightness) levels; swap them out for actual illuminants with similar spectral distributions but different brightnesses (as in, move the dimmer switch up and down) and the colors thus defined will be perceptually dramatically brighter and dimmer, even though every sample in this exercise remains L*=100, a*=0, b*=0. The most common absolute, non-perceptual measure is XYZ...but it's something useless and unintuitive to artists (though it's really good for mathematicians). > What I’m talking about is simple. Is there a consistent way to calibrate with an ICC such that numbers above print like this when measured with a spectro (approximately as the real values have been rounded to 2 decimals): If I understand right, simplified, you want the following: R=G=B=0 => D50 L*=14.45, a*=0, b*=0 [...] R=G=B=120 => D50 L*=53.09, a*=0, b*=0 [...] R=G=B=255 => D50 L*= 96.5, a*=0, b*=0 A good perceptual rendering will come close...but, immediately, you've got some big honkin' practical problems. Maximum density is almost always far from neutral, and paper white is almost always different from neutral in a different direction. If you want closest possible to the neutral axis, you're going to have to clip both...meaning your maximum density is going to be a lot lighter, and you'll have to lay down at least some ink over the entire page. Your dMax suddenly in reality isn't as dark, and your dMin isn't as bright. Or, you can decide to have off-neutral maxima and minima...but how do you transition to and from them? Do you draw a straight line from the color of dMax to paper white? That rarely produces pleasing results. More common is to keep most of the neutral axis neutral, and then bend it to the extremes. But at what point to start bending, and how much to bend? Such considerations are what separate the good color management systems from the ugly -- and where Grame's skill (and aesthetic) in ArgyllCMS really shines through. Further complicating is that, though Lab units are supposed to be visually identical in all dimensions, such that a change of one a* unit is perceptually as "dramatic" at all points as a change of one L* unit or one b* unit...that's not actually the case. So you either need a better color space (they exist, and Graeme makes effective use of them behind the scenes) or you have to use "special sauce" magic that might result in perceptual uniformity at the expense of linearity in Lab space. And yet another complication...R=G=B=0 in your monitor's native (unprofiled) space is going to have some L* value that isn't actually 14.45, and R=G=B=255, again won't be L*=96.5. In a really tightly controlled viewing environment, your monitor _might_ have a profiled R=G=B=255 => L*=100, but I'd honestly be surprised if any such actually exists. That means that you're mapping R=G=B=255 => L*=482.7, a*=1.7, b*=-8.4 (to pick a random but realistic number) on your monitor to R=G=B=255 => L*=239.8, a*=-0.8, b*=2.5 on your printer (again random but realistic, considering typical office illumination). Hopefully, you can extrapolate the madness that ensues.... The typical approach to what I think you're trying to accomplish is what's called, "soft proofing." You can supply Photoshop with your printer's profile and tell it to render the image as closely as possible to how it'll print. Since monitors typically have larger gamuts than printers, especially near the neutral axis, this usually works well. The soft proof will look washed out compared to the rest of the screen...but, in a well-controlled environment, the print placed next to the monitor will look exactly as washed-out. The real-world problem is that your print is going to, again, look completely different when you take it out of your perfectly-controlled proofing booth and into the real world. It's why National Geographic looks drop-dead gorgeous in a viewing booth but is nearly uselessly dark in the typical living room in the evening. You could actually make a print that looks drop-dead gorgeous in the living room, but it's going to look washed-out and faint in that viewing booth.... If I might suggest...the perfect starting point for you, right this instant, would be to grab a roll of PTFE (teflon) thread tape. It's as close as you're going to get to a perfect lambertian reflector without spending thousands of dollars -- and you need expensive equipment to tell the difference. Fill your monitor with white, and hold the roll in front of the monitor. The extent to which there's a visual mismatch between the two is the extent to which your viewing environment is compromised. Until the thread tape and the monitor match, nothing you ever get out of the printer will match. It's a brutal test for all its simplicity and cost-effectiveness. It's also quite enlightening.... Cheers, b&

3 4

Re: Linear Tonal Response output (print) ICC profiles possible?
by forums＠walkerblackwell.com 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

This was an off-list reply, putting it back on-list.. > > Which, in turn, brings me to suggest that what you _actually_ want is to build a custom profile that uses the actual illuminant of the viewing conditions (ArgyllCMS can do this) coupled with _perceptual_ intent. Do that, and, to the limits of your workflow, the print will visually match the monitor. > I’m not looking for a visual match. That’s what normal ICCs do. What I’m looking for is this: Let’s say we have 18 equidistant values (actual patches in a target) from 0-255 in Photoshop. These would be: 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 Let’e say our dMax is L* 14.45 on Matte Paper and our dMin (paper white) is L* 96.5 So, Photoshop value of 0 of would be L* of 14.45 and Photoshop value of 255 would be L* of 96.5 What I’m talking about is simple. Is there a consistent way to calibrate with an ICC such that numbers above print like this when measured with a spectro (approximately as the real values have been rounded to 2 decimals): L* 14.45 L* 19.28 L* 24.11 L* 28.94 L* 33.77 L* 38.6 L* 43.43 L* 48.26 L* 53.09 L* 57.92 L* 62.75 L* 67.58 L* 72.41 L* 77.24 L* 82.07 L* 86.9 L* 91.73 L* 96.5 best, Walker

2 2

AW: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 36
by Juergen Seitz 05 Jan '18

05 Jan '18

Hi Martin, The "issue" with F52 is the papertint. With F52 it is the first time that we are handling a reference characterization data set which is as far as -10b* from neutral. In fact, this papertint reflects quite well what we get from the many uncoated production substrates and prints, so this standard, describing a specific offset printing condition is really good... but: The issue is to be found in the typical handling of a white point in the ICC color workflow. The complete greybalance tips over to this very bluish paper tint and then the CMY-balance gets "out of order" to compensate accordingly. Maybe one of the ICC profiling solutions delivers some bette interpretation with the perceptual intent? With our attempt to keep a most consistent color appearance possible, we have developed our own gamut mapping. please find a little Lab-tif file showing a FOGRA39 to FOGRA52 conversion here: https://owncloud.gmgcolor.com/owncloud/index.php/s/OdMOCwwMz1PcQv8 If you open this in Photoshop, you can compare the image on the different Layers and you will see what a typical ICC conversion is doing, when you convert from F39 to F52, or what a GMG- DL-profile is doing. Our profiles can be used either in our ColorServer application or within our Photoshop-Plugin. Kind regards Juergen -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Colorsync-users [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+juergen.seitz=gmgcolor.com@lists.apple.com] Im Auftrag von colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com Gesendet: Samstag, 9. September 2017 16:53 An: colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com Betreff: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 36 Send Colorsync-users mailing list submissions to colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com You can reach the person managing the list at colorsync-users-owner(a)lists.apple.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Colorsync-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Roger Breton) 2. RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Roger Breton) 3. RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Roger Breton) 4. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Martin Orpen) 5. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Graeme Gill) 6. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Martin Orpen) 7. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Graeme Gill) 8. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Martin Orpen) 9. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] (Dan Bergstrom) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 15:31:40 -0400 From: "Roger Breton" <graxx(a)videotron.ca> To: "'Martin Orpen'" <martin(a)idea-digital.com>, "''colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List'" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <7858301d328d9$19748fc0$4c5daf40$(a)videotron.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" How's the Perceptual Intent? / Roger -----Original Message----- From: Colorsync-users [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Martin Orpen Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 1:04 PM To: 'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] > On 4 Sep 2017, at 19:27, Martin Orpen <martin(a)idea-digital.com> wrote: > > I’ve downloaded it and it works very well (and with the yellow as I’d expect from the 52 data). Having taken a closer look, BasICColor Print is also producing poor relative intent separations from the 52 data. The neutral rendering is just as questionable as i1Profiler’s — the only difference being that X-Rite’s engine maintains the hideous blue blacks and BasICColor neutralises it. The magenta plummets by 30% between L31 & L28, while yellow climbs by 20% and cyan drops 6%. I’ve never seen results this bad from any other data set. It’s ridiculous having a *standard* that requires massive editing before repro houses can create an ICC profile that matches the generic profiles published by the ECI. -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/graxx%40videotron.ca This email sent to graxx(a)videotron.ca ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 16:11:36 -0400 From: "Roger Breton" <graxx(a)videotron.ca> To: "'Martin Orpen'" <martin(a)idea-digital.com>, "''colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List'" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <78c9a01d328de$ae8419a0$0b8c4ce0$(a)videotron.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Martin wrote : > It’s ridiculous having a *standard* that requires massive editing before repro houses can create an ICC profile that matches the generic profiles published by the ECI. Doesn't the ECI site offers some kind of "standard" Fogra52 ICC profile? I suppose you long tried that option. / Roger ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 16:28:38 -0400 From: "Roger Breton" <graxx(a)videotron.ca> To: "''colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List'" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <78f8f01d328e1$0e8869d0$2b993d70$(a)videotron.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Oops! Misread what Martin wrote.... What about using the same "tools" used by the ECI to generate their generic ICC profile? / Roger -----Original Message----- From: Colorsync-users [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Roger Breton Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 4:12 PM To: 'Martin Orpen' <martin(a)idea-digital.com>; ''colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List' <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: RE: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Martin wrote : > It’s ridiculous having a *standard* that requires massive editing before repro houses can create an ICC profile that matches the generic profiles published by the ECI. Doesn't the ECI site offers some kind of "standard" Fogra52 ICC profile? I suppose you long tried that option. / Roger _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/graxx%40videotron.ca This email sent to graxx(a)videotron.ca ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:39:15 +0100 From: Martin Orpen <martin(a)idea-digital.com> To: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <AAC48E54-AFB1-4331-9A16-DB91731F7C9A(a)idea-digital.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 8 Sep 2017, at 20:31, Roger Breton <graxx(a)videotron.ca> wrote: > > How's the Perceptual Intent? Smooth, but the blacks still don’t match. And, as the aim here is to generate profiles for black & white or critical neutral reproduction in CMYK, we don’t really need any proprietary perceptual voodoo. We need blacks that match. >> It’s ridiculous having a *standard* that requires massive editing before repro houses can create an ICC profile that matches the generic profiles published by the ECI. > > Doesn't the ECI site offers some kind of "standard" Fogra52 ICC profile? > I suppose you long tried that option. Yep, and that’s where the problem is. PSO Uncoated and whatever number of variants you want to produce yourself from the 47 data yield images that match *fairly* well. PSO Uncoated v3 and your custom ICC profiles made from the 52 data yield images that don’t match. -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 09:08:04 +0200 From: Graeme Gill <graeme2(a)argyllcms.com> To: ColorSync <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <4520dfb5-763a-f387-3d2a-e7f3fd6ad6ff(a)argyllcms.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Martin Orpen wrote: > The Fogra 52 data produces neutrals composed of CMK and zero Y in both > i1Profiler and Argyll. I'm not seeing that (at least with my current code): colprof -v -qm -kx fogra52 icclu -fb -ia fogra52.icc 100.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.007017 0.000764 0.081098 0.000000 [CMYK](clip) 50.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.082952 0.039821 0.172167 0.656606 [CMYK] 40.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.195334 0.103255 0.268755 0.778196 [CMYK] 30.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.704504 0.399554 0.299435 0.917631 [CMYK] 20.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.998257 0.923926 0.930881 0.996716 [CMYK] 10.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.994710 0.972349 0.899008 0.998990 [CMYK] 0.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.983620 1.000000 0.915429 1.000000 [CMYK] colprof -v -qm -kz fogra52 icclu -fb -ia fogra52.icc 100.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.007017 0.000764 0.081098 0.000000 [CMYK](clip) 50.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.606688 0.510562 0.654812 0.000731 [CMYK] 40.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.695956 0.650859 0.853761 0.179810 [CMYK] 30.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.791740 0.543053 0.444419 0.844733 [CMYK] 20.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.998257 0.923926 0.930881 0.996716 [CMYK] 10.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.994710 0.972349 0.899008 0.998990 [CMYK] 0.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.983620 1.000000 0.915429 1.000000 [CMYK] what exactly are you looking for ? Cheers, Graeme Gill. ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 12:15:53 +0100 From: Martin Orpen <martin(a)idea-digital.com> To: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <65DD99CB-90C3-4AC6-9CEB-26D8C7AC0CDB(a)idea-digital.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > On 9 Sep 2017, at 08:08, Graeme Gill <graeme2(a)argyllcms.com> wrote: > > colprof -v -qm -kz fogra52 > > icclu -fb -ia fogra52.icc > 100.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.007017 0.000764 0.081098 0.000000 > [CMYK](clip) > 50.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.606688 0.510562 0.654812 0.000731 > [CMYK] > 40.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.695956 0.650859 0.853761 0.179810 > [CMYK] > 30.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.791740 0.543053 0.444419 0.844733 > [CMYK] > 20.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.998257 0.923926 0.930881 0.996716 > [CMYK] > 10.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.994710 0.972349 0.899008 0.998990 [CMYK] > 0.0 0.0 0.0 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.983620 1.000000 0.915429 1.000000 > [CMYK] > > what exactly are you looking for ? Yellow in separations with increased K generation :) In profiles I made using Argyll in March this year I was getting this from -kx 300 TAC 60.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.042220 0.021155 0.138908 0.493434 [CMYK] 50.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.082952 0.039821 0.172168 0.656604 [CMYK] 30.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.703806 0.399562 0.299396 0.917587 [CMYK] 20.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.910211 0.696531 0.426875 0.996719 [CMYK] 10.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.932469 0.806219 0.293490 0.998988 [CMYK] 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 1.000000 0.864791 0.135001 1.000000 [CMYK] But, more importantly, this is what you actually get from relative conversions: 50.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.103877 0.046326 0.000000 0.712330 [CMYK] 30.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 1.000000 0.531888 0.077466 0.945821 [CMYK] 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 1.000000 0.864791 0.135001 1.000000 [CMYK] And perceptual has NO yellow whatsoever! 50.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.078745 0.037454 0.000000 0.635533 [CMYK] 30.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.265519 0.116809 0.000000 0.776893 [CMYK] 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 1.000000 0.549650 0.000000 0.922678 [CMYK] -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 15:57:15 +0200 From: Graeme Gill <graeme2(a)argyllcms.com> To: "colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com >> ColorSync" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <0e66500b-08e9-be72-74bd-83befd7fd7e7(a)argyllcms.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Martin Orpen wrote: > Yellow in separations with increased K generation :) Why ? The nature of the device response is that you can either have lots of yellow or you can have the result being neutral. Take your pick. i.e. the amount of yellow is correct to reproduce the desired color. [ Perceptual response also depends to a degree on the source profile used. ] Cheers, Graeme Gill. ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 15:35:29 +0100 From: Martin Orpen <martin(a)idea-digital.com> To: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <641CB64A-7671-4D76-BA09-616A7A8BADDB(a)idea-digital.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 9 Sep 2017, at 14:57, Graeme Gill <graeme2(a)argyllcms.com> wrote: > > Martin Orpen wrote: > >> Yellow in separations with increased K generation :) > > Why ? > > The nature of the device response is that you can either have lots of > yellow or you can have the result being neutral. > > Take your pick. > > i.e. the amount of yellow is correct to reproduce the desired color. In print, the result doesn’t look neutral, or natural. If you make a high GCR custom profile from FOGRA52 and proof or print the results to compare them to images separate using PSO Uncoated v2 they do not match and will not get approved by a client. They are too blue. High GCR profiles using the FOGRA47 data work better than those made from 52. If the device demanded blue blacks, why doesn’t the ECI profile generate them? -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 14:52:18 +0000 From: Dan Bergstrom <DanBergstrom(a)primarycolor.com> To: Martin Orpen <martin(a)idea-digital.com> Cc: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List" <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler [subject corrected] Message-ID: <205D2B3C-C8A4-4E06-A8B7-615478A11E59(a)primarycolor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Yeah and low TAC will look thin (weak). Also you want each channel to have good shape. -- Dan Bergstrom | Color Technology and Quality | PRIMARY COLOR ORANGE COUNTY http://www.primarycolor.com | T 949 660 7080 C 949 616 4986 > On Sep 9, 2017, at 7:35 AM, Martin Orpen <martin(a)idea-digital.com> wrote: > > >> On 9 Sep 2017, at 14:57, Graeme Gill <graeme2(a)argyllcms.com> wrote: >> >> Martin Orpen wrote: >> >>> Yellow in separations with increased K generation :) >> >> Why ? >> >> The nature of the device response is that you can either >> have lots of yellow or you can have the result being neutral. >> >> Take your pick. >> >> i.e. the amount of yellow is correct to reproduce the desired color. > > > > In print, the result doesn’t look neutral, or natural. > > If you make a high GCR custom profile from FOGRA52 and proof or print the results to compare them to images separate using PSO Uncoated v2 they do not match and will not get approved by a client. > > They are too blue. > > High GCR profiles using the FOGRA47 data work better than those made from 52. > > If the device demanded blue blacks, why doesn’t the ECI profile generate them? > > -- > Martin Orpen > Idea Digital Imaging Ltd > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/danbergstrom%40prim… > > This email sent to danbergstrom(a)primarycolor.com ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Colorsync-users mailing list Colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users ------------------------------ End of Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 36 ***********************************************

5 8

Re: colorsync-users Digest, Vol 15, Issue 1
by Barry Rudick 04 Jan '18

04 Jan '18

Suggest going to this link on Lexjet website, it is the ICC profiles page. There is a video about loading custom media choices into the printer. Phototex is a choice along with their profile for Phototex. http://www.lexjet.com/icc-profiles Cheers, Barry Rudick Bayou Fine Art Imaging > On Jan 3, 2018, at 2:00 PM, colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com wrote: > > Send colorsync-users mailing list submissions to > colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > colorsync-users-owner(a)lists.apple.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of colorsync-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Photo Tex (Barry Gorrell) > 2. Re: Photo Tex (John Castronovo) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 23:48:15 +0000 > From: Barry Gorrell <bgorrell(a)cecil.edu> > To: "colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com" > <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> > Subject: Re: Photo Tex > Message-ID: <4D75FAFB-22E5-4954-8B0F-E7C656388F49(a)cecil.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hello Barry, > > Thanks for the feedback, but our printer is a Canon imagePROGRAF 6400 so the “Enhanced Matte” media setting is not an option as it is on Epson Stylus Printers. Comparable media settings on Canon iPF printers would be either “Photo Matte” or “Photo Matte Premium”. Unfortunately when we print our targets with either of these media settings, we get lots of bleeding and over saturation of the test patches. > > Regards, > Barry Gorrell > > [id:50FA3AFD-DCB0-4FC0-BA82-AB68F1EFD69A] > > > From: colorsync-users <colorsync-users-bounces+bgorrell=cecil.edu(a)lists.apple.com> on behalf of "colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com" <colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com> > Reply-To: Colorsync Users List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> > Date: Saturday, December 23, 2017 at 3:00 PM > To: Colorsync Users List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> > Subject: colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 67 > > Send colorsync-users mailing list submissions to > colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users-request@lists.apple.com> > > You can reach the person managing the list at > colorsync-users-owner(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users-owner@lists.apple.com> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of colorsync-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Photo Tex (Barry Rudick) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:08:49 -0600 > From: Barry Rudick <barryr(a)azphoto.com<mailto:barryr@azphoto.com>> > To: ColorSync Users Mailing List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users@lists.apple.com>> > Subject: Photo Tex > Message-ID: <BE890702-DC2C-4F5A-8337-05E109E7DA14(a)azphoto.com<mailto:BE890702-DC2C-4F5A-8337-05E109E7DA14@azphoto.com>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > We have used Photo Tex for a while now. > > I believe the media setting recommended is Enhanced Matte. > > > Barry Rudick > Bayou Fine Art Imaging > Houston, Tx > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > colorsync-users mailing list > colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users > > > ------------------------------ > > End of colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 67 > *********************************************** > > >

1 0

Re: Photo Tex
by Barry Gorrell 03 Jan '18

03 Jan '18

Hello Barry, Thanks for the feedback, but our printer is a Canon imagePROGRAF 6400 so the “Enhanced Matte” media setting is not an option as it is on Epson Stylus Printers. Comparable media settings on Canon iPF printers would be either “Photo Matte” or “Photo Matte Premium”. Unfortunately when we print our targets with either of these media settings, we get lots of bleeding and over saturation of the test patches. Regards, Barry Gorrell [id:50FA3AFD-DCB0-4FC0-BA82-AB68F1EFD69A] From: colorsync-users <colorsync-users-bounces+bgorrell=cecil.edu(a)lists.apple.com> on behalf of "colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com" <colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com> Reply-To: Colorsync Users List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Date: Saturday, December 23, 2017 at 3:00 PM To: Colorsync Users List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com> Subject: colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 67 Send colorsync-users mailing list submissions to colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users-request@lists.apple.com> You can reach the person managing the list at colorsync-users-owner(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users-owner@lists.apple.com> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of colorsync-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Photo Tex (Barry Rudick) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:08:49 -0600 From: Barry Rudick <barryr(a)azphoto.com<mailto:barryr@azphoto.com>> To: ColorSync Users Mailing List <colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users@lists.apple.com>> Subject: Photo Tex Message-ID: <BE890702-DC2C-4F5A-8337-05E109E7DA14(a)azphoto.com<mailto:BE890702-DC2C-4F5A-8337-05E109E7DA14@azphoto.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii We have used Photo Tex for a while now. I believe the media setting recommended is Enhanced Matte. Barry Rudick Bayou Fine Art Imaging Houston, Tx ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ colorsync-users mailing list colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com<mailto:colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users ------------------------------ End of colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 67 ***********************************************

2 1