Re: Any Utility to Facilitate Comparisons of Alternate Printer Profiles/Intents?
[Sorry, the previous response shows up blank; resending as plain text.] -- To determine if there is potential advantage in making a per-image choice for final profile and rendering intent choices for a group of images to be printed for a museum exhibition. Since the various perceptual renderings involve different parameter choices made at the time of profile generation, and since I've often noticed that ProfileMaker profiles in perceptual rendering may affect overall luminosity (most often looking a bit lighter than the corresponding relative colorimetric rendering). So I'm really looking a visual comparison, not a colorimetric comparison. All the images are currently archived in 16-bit Lab. Rick Gordon --------------------- On 3/24/16, 2:28 PM, MARK SEGAL wrote:
What aspects exactly are you trying to compare, because there are different approaches depending on what you want the comparisons to show.
RICK GORDON EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING ___________________________________________ WWW: http://www.shelterpub.com
In that case, I think the most practical and easiest thing to do would be to open the images in Lightroom, in the Develop Model, in Softproof mode, ans switch the RI of the selected profile back and forth between Relative and Perceptual to see which makes the image appear more like how you want it. You can also do the same in Photoshop by setting up the softproof condition in the View menu (if I remember correctly). Mark From: Rick Gordon <lists@rickgordon.com> To: ColorSync List <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 7:09 PM Subject: Re: Any Utility to Facilitate Comparisons of Alternate Printer Profiles/Intents? [Sorry, the previous response shows up blank; resending as plain text.] -- To determine if there is potential advantage in making a per-image choice for final profile and rendering intent choices for a group of images to be printed for a museum exhibition. Since the various perceptual renderings involve different parameter choices made at the time of profile generation, and since I've often noticed that ProfileMaker profiles in perceptual rendering may affect overall luminosity (most often looking a bit lighter than the corresponding relative colorimetric rendering). So I'm really looking a visual comparison, not a colorimetric comparison. All the images are currently archived in 16-bit Lab. Rick Gordon --------------------- On 3/24/16, 2:28 PM, MARK SEGAL wrote:
What aspects exactly are you trying to compare, because there are different approaches depending on what you want the comparisons to show.
RICK GORDON EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING ___________________________________________ WWW: http://www.shelterpub.com _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/mgsegal%40rogers.com This email sent to mgsegal@rogers.com
On Mar 24, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Rick Gordon <lists@rickgordon.com> wrote:
To determine if there is potential advantage in making a per-image choice for final profile and rendering intent choices for a group of images to be printed for a museum exhibition.
That's the intended purpose of perceptual rendering. And it really does work that way with ArgyllCMS. The absolute and relative colorimetric rendering intents are designed to enable one device to simulate another, and are of almost no use outside of proofing. The saturation intent is excellent for business graphics (pie charts, that sort of thing) where the hue angle isn't nearly as important as that the colors be as saturated and eye-grabbing as possible. And, remember: in all cases, if the output gamut entirely encompasses the input gamut, then there's no rendering at all and everything is (supposed to be) equivalent to absolute colorimetric. But, when the output gamut is smaller than the input...if you want the visual appearance of the output to be the closest reasonably attainable to the original, perceptual is what you want. And, again, with ArgyllCMS, the perceptual rendering is frighteningly good...as in, you can make prints on two radically different stocks and the perception is that it's the paper that's different, not that the print is different. Cheers, b&
participants (3)
-
Ben Goren
-
MARK SEGAL
-
Rick Gordon