I absolutely agree with Andrew. I noticed that iteration did nothing to improve quality of profiles if you are using 1485 or 1617 patches for cmyk or 1728 for rgb or more. If you speak about iterations like a pro rip (cgs or gmg) where it dramatically improves the result and quality. It is useless for linearizing (bringing printer back to known state) unlike those rips can do. You replace the inks or put new roll of paper and you will still have to redo the profile. You don't need to do this if you have a rip. Just linearize with a small chart. Best Regards, Derek Lambert On Aug 26, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Andrew Rodney <andrew@digitaldog.net> wrote:
On Aug 26, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Dan Gillespie wrote:
You also get several features that you didn't have with Profiler such as iteration and verification (typically RIP features - but now you can iterate without a RIP)
It would be interesting to bring the iteration into a discussion. I found it did absolutely nothing if I started with a sufficiently large patch sample from the get go (for RGB, 1728 patches). IOW, testing I did showed that adding another 3000 patches resulted in a fraction of a dE difference in the two profiles. Chris Murphy found similar results testing a CMYK profile.
I also think we need to be clear what iteration does and doesn’t do (so far, an open question if you will). My understanding is unlike say Oris, this iteration process is not designed to account for device drift or changes. Its designed for an improved resulting profile. In my tests that didn’t happen. What I was told by X-rite is that iteration is useful for those who start with an initial small patch process (ala ColorMunki which uses initially only 50 patches, then iterates the 2nd 50). That technology works amazingly well IMOH. But if an advanced user starts with a sufficiently large patch sample, and that number is open to debate, then iteration isn’t at all useful. That’s been my experience.
I was hoping that the technology would improve a profile built with a decent set of initial patches. Especially if you feed the iteration specific colors. An example would be building a profile for an Epson printer, then iterating with a number of neutral gray patches to improve gray balance such we could use an ICC profile instead of the Advanced B&W driver for better neutrality. This is something Bill Atkinson did many years ago when he created his profiles for the older Epson printers. His process actually used the additional patches, along with some analysis of the original to better shift neutrality of the resulting profiles. I did not see any benefit to suppling the iteration i1P engine more neutral patches in this respect.
Now that i1Profiler has been out awhile, I’m wondering if anyone else is seeing these conditions.
Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/csync%40colorforest.n...
This email sent to csync@colorforest.net