David, It is a fact that all ICC profiles are not created "equal", from the same characterization data. They should match closely on the CMYK to Lab direction but not necessarily on the Lab to CMYK (or Lab to RGB) direction. So that is one important difference. It does not mean that something is very wrong with profile construction, it means all profilers are obviously subject to different "rules". Now the case I'm after is when two conditions appear different to my eyes, either because of illumination or because of physical differences in the colorants. It's possible that colors don't match because of my deviation from the standard observer but that's an hypothesis I must rule out at the onset. I've long took the Munsell-Farnsworth 100 Hue test but that's not a guarantee of anything, in my experience. I've seen pressmen take the test and yet, they still see colors differently than me... Why I need to edit profiles then? I could well "hide" behind the numbers and leave it at that. Suppose my proof visibly appears "reddish" overall, compared, say, to my press sheet, despite being well within some published tolerance. That's entirely possible, because of instruments idiosyncrasies or what not. Suppose I'm not happy with the status quo and have the nerve to pretend I could improve things, visually, through some kind of profile editing. That is one case where it would be useful to coerce colors one way with a profile editor or through built-in editing tools of a proofing RIP. Of course, doing so may have unwanted side effects but that's something I'm willing to live with, it's a choice I consciously make. Best / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Millers' Photography L.L.C. Sent: Saturday, February 9, 2013 5:37 PM To: colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Subject: Re: Kodak Custom Color Tools Well, I was taught, trained, had drilled into my brain, if the custom icc printer profile was not good, do not tweak it, but create another custom .icc profile. I don't know where that stands with any one else. I create my own custom .icc profiles for my NEC PA271w, about every three (3) days. And create my own custom .icc profile for my Epson Pro 9900. I also do this service for my clients. Sure, I have looked at some canned profiles. Tried one. In my humble opinion, there is nothing like my own home grown .icc profiles I have complete confidence in. I remember in my early days, (OS 8.6) there was a "what you see is what you get" by some software vender. Don't remember the name. It included a profile editor that was simple to use. Then I get the Datacolor, with Spyder, or whatever the name is/was, the master edition, and it included a complicated profile editor. Never ever did learn to use it. Still have this master suite and Spyder. Threw out the suction cups that came with it. Don't use it. Anyone want it? But here is what really challenged me in those days of OS 8.6. Different software providers' programs never gave the same profile, for the printer, monitor, or scanner. The worst offender in my experience was the Spyder stuff. Being way too naive, I had the illusion all programs would give the exact same results. Wrong! ! ! I currently use i1Profile and i1spectrophotometer. I don't want to get messed up with other software programs. Even as I write this, I have tried i1Profiler with my NEC PA271w, as well as the SpectraView II software. I just don't know if there is a difference in the profiles. However I do keep using the SpectraView II software for the NEC. An NEC technician told me, after I had purchase the SpectraView II software, not to purchase their software if I already have the i1Profiler. So, if someone is unhappy with the canned .icc profile, I would suggest using a custom profiling service. Cheers, Millers' Photography L.L.C. David B. Miller, Pharm. D., member 3809 Alabama Street Bellingham, WA 98226-4585 360-739-2826 Sent from my MacBook Pro 17inch