Re: Monaco Profiler 4.7 to X-Rite i1 Publisher Pro Upgrade (iteration)
Hi all, I think Terry's explanation of iteration is decent. The iteration function will not give you a whopping difference in the profile, but it can be appreciable. For example, I made an “iteration” or “optimization” or “color edification” chart that is comprised of about 2500 patches… all gray balance. Technically, it ranges from L*=0 to L*=100, with all rotations of a* and b* in +/- 1 and 2 increments. If you think about the gray axis of a profile as the “straw in the center of your drink”, think of this as a “really fat straw” with a buttload of patches crammed into it. Now keep in mind that, if you just tried to evenly disperse that many patches into that small of a region, it would be impossible to get a regular sampling of data. However, because i1Profiler dynamically creates those patches based on the profile you’ve already made, it automatically distributes them evenly. The net-net of all this is that, when using this chart, I typically see about a .5dE reduction. Sometime a lot more. Sometime a lot less. It’s largely dependent on how “regular” your printer is. Fiber anyone? What I really like about it is that i usually pick up an L* in both weight and purity. The black gets blacker and the shadow grays get cleaner… more neutral. If you’ve ever taken a good close look as the gray curves of a MonacoPROFILER profile, the horse tends to run off the track a bit once you get past the 3/4 shadow. While i1Profier already does a better job of handling this...the extra iteration can really snap that behavior back in. Heyah! I did some ungodly iteration tests with some huge charts and was able to widdle the dE down quite a bit. However, it was fairly consuming (in time/paper/ink) considering that I was well within the standard tolerance of most print specifications with my initial profile. I really do like the gray chart if I do say so myself. It fits on 1 page big page of for an iSis XL. If anybody would like me to post it, please let me know. Thanks all, Marc marc@colormanagement.com
On Aug 26, 2011, at 6:12 PM, Marc Levine wrote:
If anybody would like me to post it, please let me know.
Yes please! Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/
On Aug 26, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Marc Levine wrote:
I really do like the gray chart if I do say so myself. It fits on 1 page big page of for an iSis XL. If anybody would like me to post it, please let me know.
Yes, would love to see! ColorPort XML file? Scott Martin www.on-sight.com
No way. Colorport only knows “device charts”. This is a “Lab chart”. i1Profiler converts it to device using the profile that you are optimizing. That’s the trick. I went ahead and posted a blog with all the details. You can go get the file, plus see a complete set of instructions for loading it into i1Profiler here: http://www.i1upgrades.com/category/tech-corner/ Marc marc@colormanagement.com On Aug 27, 2011, at 10:38 AM, Scott Martin wrote:
On Aug 26, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Marc Levine wrote:
I really do like the gray chart if I do say so myself. It fits on 1 page big page of for an iSis XL. If anybody would like me to post it, please let me know.
Yes, would love to see! ColorPort XML file?
Scott Martin www.on-sight.com
How "gray", Marc? Does it compare favourably to Munsell grays off a ColorChecker chart? 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 Marc Levine Sent: August-26-11 8:12 PM To: colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Subject: Re: Monaco Profiler 4.7 to X-Rite i1 Publisher Pro Upgrade (iteration) ... I did some ungodly iteration tests with some huge charts and was able to widdle the dE down quite a bit. However, it was fairly consuming (in time/paper/ink) considering that I was well within the standard tolerance of most print specifications with my initial profile. I really do like the gray chart if I do say so myself. It fits on 1 page big page of for an iSis XL. If anybody would like me to post it, please let me know. Thanks all, Marc
The resulting profile produces measurably better grays, but that won’t change the spectral properties of the media. My impression on the benefits the ColorChecker is that the pigments used to created the chart colors were specially selected to better represent the spectral qualities of “real life objects”. I’d have to do some studying to qualify this a bit more. Long-story short, I believe the optimization does improve the grays, but whether or not you could print some grays and use them as a visual standard would be largely dependent on the spectral qualities and durability of the colorant (ink) and substrate (paper) you use. Marc On Aug 27, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Roger Breton wrote:
How "gray", Marc? Does it compare favourably to Munsell grays off a ColorChecker chart?
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 Marc Levine Sent: August-26-11 8:12 PM To: colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Subject: Re: Monaco Profiler 4.7 to X-Rite i1 Publisher Pro Upgrade (iteration) ...
I did some ungodly iteration tests with some huge charts and was able to widdle the dE down quite a bit. However, it was fairly consuming (in time/paper/ink) considering that I was well within the standard tolerance of most print specifications with my initial profile. I really do like the gray chart if I do say so myself. It fits on 1 page big page of for an iSis XL. If anybody would like me to post it, please let me know.
Thanks all, Marc
Would an iterative method on higher patch numbers like discussed here not require more consistent spectrometers than the usual category? Are the different opinions related to the use of different meters? With the assumption that the printer already delivers consistent targets for every step of the process. -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions | Dinkla Grafische Techniek | | Tel.040-2920132 Mob.0649426098 | | www.pigment-print.com | | ( unvollendet ) |
Hi Ernst, Using a measurement device with “even better repeatability” should create and “even better” profile, whether you are “iterating" or not. Keep in mind that this method of iterating is more like printing a “smart page 2” of your test chart. I don’t think this process explicitly requires a better instrument compared to the standard 1-shot method of creating a profile. In general, I would recommend buying the best spectro that you can afford (both in initial investment and in ongoing use) for your color critical applications. There’s a couple of things to think about when determining which measurement device you will use and repeatability is only 1 of them. FWIW, my tests were done with an iSis. Marc On Aug 28, 2011, at 2:50 PM, Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Would an iterative method on higher patch numbers like discussed here not require more consistent spectrometers than the usual category? Are the different opinions related to the use of different meters? With the assumption that the printer already delivers consistent targets for every step of the process.
-- Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions
| Dinkla Grafische Techniek | | Tel.040-2920132 Mob.0649426098 | | www.pigment-print.com | | ( unvollendet ) |
On 08/28/2011 09:19 PM, Marc Levine wrote:
FWIW, my tests were done with an iSis.
Marc
Marc, I noticed your use of the iSis before I made that reply. Its reputation of repeatability is the reason I asked the question. -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions | Dinkla Grafische Techniek | | www.pigment-print.com | | ( unvollendet ) |
On Aug 26, 2011, at 6:12 PM, Marc Levine wrote:
The net-net of all this is that, when using this chart, I typically see about a .5dE reduction. Sometime a lot more. Sometime a lot less. It’s largely dependent on how “regular” your printer is.
Thanks for posting that cxf file Marc. I did some tests today. I took a profile originally built in i1P for an Epson 3880, Luster paper. I then optimized it using your new target. I printed two of the neutral Roman 16 targets (Midtone and LowKey) with the original and new optimized profile. The optimization did indeed improve the output in terms of gray balance as I view them side by side under a light booth. I see the smooth neutral gradients in the background of both images appearing more neutral and a bit smoother! This is more evident to my eye on the Midtone BW Roman. The minimal effort to run this optimization with an iSis is clearly worthwhile! This target should be included on the install disk. I would encourage others who have the time to test this new optimization target give it a try, report back. Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/
participants (5)
-
Andrew Rodney
-
Ernst Dinkla
-
Marc Levine
-
Roger Breton
-
Scott Martin