Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 14
Hi Martin I did a few tests in i1P and confirm your findings. The "Intelligent Black" feature does odd thing when it thinks TAC should be low and the Max K separation/width is contributing to the low yellow. I've had issues with the settings for digital as have others online. I remade the profile with the same data and it was fine, so it's an i1P thing. I've never got an answer or seen one from X-Rite on the issue. Malcolm +44 (0)20 3239 3330 +44 (0)7910 413421 mm@colour-engine.com skype; print_and_proof LinkedIn <http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/malcolm-mackenzie/7/326/778/> Twitter <https://twitter.com/ColourEngineLtd> www.colour-engine.com TeamViewer Quick Support <https://get.teamviewer.com/xjv8qcf> On 6 March 2017 at 20:00, <colorsync-users-request@lists.apple.com> wrote:
Send Colorsync-users mailing list submissions to 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@lists.apple.com
You can reach the person managing the list at 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. Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler (Martin Orpen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 13:44:12 +0000 From: Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com> To: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List" <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: FOGRA52 & i1Profiler Message-ID: <3C5CA2A6-7570-4A90-925E-6C78A7403549@idea-digital.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On 1 Mar 2017, at 00:21, Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com> wrote:
I’ve made some MaxK and Full Black profiles using both the supplied FOGRA52.mxf and by importing the raw ECI data and they produce a Y channel that has next to nothing in it if you use the profiles in Photoshop.
I guess that FOGRA52 isn’t that popular then?
The PSO Uncoated v3 (FOGRA52) profile documentation says:
The profile was created using the Heidelberg Color Tool 17 with the following settings: black length 9 (starting point 10%) black width 10 total dot area 300% maximum black 96%
I can’t get yellow values anywhere near those generated by this profile using i1Profiler or ArgyllCMS.
And nothing even remotely close to the neutral curves of the Heidelberg perceptual rendering.
So I gave up and separated to a custom built FOGRA47L instead and then proofed the job to FOGRA52.
I find it odd that the dark patch on the ECI/BVDM Gray Control Strip for FOGRA52 is C62 M55 Y60 — an ink combination that the ICC profile is incapable of producing...
-- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
On 7 Mar 2017, at 10:45, Malcolm Mackenzie <mm@malcolmmackenzie.co.uk> wrote:
I did a few tests in i1P and confirm your findings. The "Intelligent Black" feature does odd thing when it thinks TAC should be low and the Max K separation/width is contributing to the low yellow. I've had issues with the settings for digital as have others online. I remade the profile with the same data and it was fine, so it's an i1P thing. I've never got an answer or seen one from X-Rite on the issue.
Malcolm I also used ArgyllCMS and the results were the same, so I think that the Heidelberg software (or the operators) are editing out some of the FOGRA52 data. The neutral curves of the “official” profile have a distinctive relative intent shape at L30 where cyan exceeds black and yellow drops away. But the drop is only from 42.8% to 40.6% where it is artificially held in a straight line. i1Profiler and Argyll create high GCR profiles which max out with yellow somewhere around 15% which then drops to zero as the cyan values climb steeply. I think that the data either needs editing or an explanation of why the Heidelberg software is able to create a profile that can’t be matched by other profile making apps. The FOGRA51 data is isn’t much better either, but easier to spot why it’s problematic when it contains readings like this: c100.0 m100.0 y0.0 k100.0 = L11.43 a5.76 b0.01 c100.0 m100.0 y100.0 k100.0 = L12.71 a0.53 b4.89 Regards -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
I wanted to bump this thread from March on to the list again. We need to create variants of Fogra 52 with increased K generation, but the results are terrible. The Fogra 52 data produces neutrals composed of CMK and zero Y in both i1Profiler and Argyll. This is the exact opposite of what we need on press Why is this happening? Is this just a problem with i1Profiler & Argyll — which work as expected with every other Fogra data set? Or are the ECI making additional edits to create their profiles using Heidelberg software from this data set and not declaring it in the specification?
On 7 Mar 2017, at 11:51, Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2017, at 10:45, Malcolm Mackenzie <mm@malcolmmackenzie.co.uk> wrote:
I did a few tests in i1P and confirm your findings. The "Intelligent Black" feature does odd thing when it thinks TAC should be low and the Max K separation/width is contributing to the low yellow. I've had issues with the settings for digital as have others online. I remade the profile with the same data and it was fine, so it's an i1P thing. I've never got an answer or seen one from X-Rite on the issue.
Malcolm
I also used ArgyllCMS and the results were the same, so I think that the Heidelberg software (or the operators) are editing out some of the FOGRA52 data.
The neutral curves of the “official” profile have a distinctive relative intent shape at L30 where cyan exceeds black and yellow drops away. But the drop is only from 42.8% to 40.6% where it is artificially held in a straight line.
i1Profiler and Argyll create high GCR profiles which max out with yellow somewhere around 15% which then drops to zero as the cyan values climb steeply.
I think that the data either needs editing or an explanation of why the Heidelberg software is able to create a profile that can’t be matched by other profile making apps.
The FOGRA51 data is isn’t much better either, but easier to spot why it’s problematic when it contains readings like this:
c100.0 m100.0 y0.0 k100.0 = L11.43 a5.76 b0.01 c100.0 m100.0 y100.0 k100.0 = L12.71 a0.53 b4.89
Regards
-- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd _______________________________________________ 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/martin%40idea-digita...
This email sent to martin@idea-digital.com
What does the ramp of pure K look like on an a*/b* plot? Is it extremely warm/yellow that there needs to be only CM and no Y in the gray ramp when the amount of K generation is jacked up? Sent from my iPad
On Sep 3, 2017, at 8:05 PM, Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com> wrote:
I wanted to bump this thread from March on to the list again.
We need to create variants of Fogra 52 with increased K generation, but the results are terrible.
The Fogra 52 data produces neutrals composed of CMK and zero Y in both i1Profiler and Argyll.
This is the exact opposite of what we need on press
Why is this happening?
Is this just a problem with i1Profiler & Argyll — which work as expected with every other Fogra data set?
Or are the ECI making additional edits to create their profiles using Heidelberg software from this data set and not declaring it in the specification?
On 7 Mar 2017, at 11:51, Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2017, at 10:45, Malcolm Mackenzie <mm@malcolmmackenzie.co.uk> wrote:
I did a few tests in i1P and confirm your findings. The "Intelligent Black" feature does odd thing when it thinks TAC should be low and the Max K separation/width is contributing to the low yellow. I've had issues with the settings for digital as have others online. I remade the profile with the same data and it was fine, so it's an i1P thing. I've never got an answer or seen one from X-Rite on the issue.
Malcolm
I also used ArgyllCMS and the results were the same, so I think that the Heidelberg software (or the operators) are editing out some of the FOGRA52 data.
The neutral curves of the “official” profile have a distinctive relative intent shape at L30 where cyan exceeds black and yellow drops away. But the drop is only from 42.8% to 40.6% where it is artificially held in a straight line.
i1Profiler and Argyll create high GCR profiles which max out with yellow somewhere around 15% which then drops to zero as the cyan values climb steeply.
I think that the data either needs editing or an explanation of why the Heidelberg software is able to create a profile that can’t be matched by other profile making apps.
The FOGRA51 data is isn’t much better either, but easier to spot why it’s problematic when it contains readings like this:
c100.0 m100.0 y0.0 k100.0 = L11.43 a5.76 b0.01 c100.0 m100.0 y100.0 k100.0 = L12.71 a0.53 b4.89
Regards
-- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd _______________________________________________ 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/martin%40idea-digita...
This email sent to martin@idea-digital.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/wyseconsul%40mac.com
This email sent to wyseconsul@mac.com
On 4 Sep 2017, at 14:09, Terence Wyse <wyseconsul@mac.com> wrote:
What does the ramp of pure K look like on an a*/b* plot? Is it extremely warm/yellow that there needs to be only CM and no Y in the gray ramp when the amount of K generation is jacked up?
No, it’s the opposite on OBA-stuffed, matte papers. Fogra52 has a media white point along the lines of L 93 a 2.5 b -10 i1Profiler is producing ugly blue/black separations if you need to do 4 colour black and white printing. Converting to a high GCR 47L profile instead of 52 gives a much better result. -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
Martin, Maybe you want to play around with basICColor print 5. You can use it with a 14day trial license without limitations. http://www.basiccolor.de/basiccolor-print-5-en/ Cheers Claas
Am 04.09.2017 um 16:35 schrieb Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com>:
On 4 Sep 2017, at 14:09, Terence Wyse <wyseconsul@mac.com> wrote:
What does the ramp of pure K look like on an a*/b* plot? Is it extremely warm/yellow that there needs to be only CM and no Y in the gray ramp when the amount of K generation is jacked up?
No, it’s the opposite on OBA-stuffed, matte papers.
Fogra52 has a media white point along the lines of L 93 a 2.5 b -10
i1Profiler is producing ugly blue/black separations if you need to do 4 colour black and white printing.
Converting to a high GCR 47L profile instead of 52 gives a much better result.
-- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd _______________________________________________ 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/lists%40bickeboeller...
This email sent to lists@bickeboeller.name
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.
On 9 Sep 2017, at 08:08, Graeme Gill <graeme2@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
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.
On 9 Sep 2017, at 14:57, Graeme Gill <graeme2@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
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@idea-digital.com> wrote:
On 9 Sep 2017, at 14:57, Graeme Gill <graeme2@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@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/danbergstrom%40prima...
This email sent to danbergstrom@primarycolor.com
On 9 Sep 2017, at 15:52, Dan Bergstrom <DanBergstrom@primarycolor.com> wrote:
Yeah and low TAC will look thin (weak). Also you want each channel to have good shape.
The shapes are awful. On the subject of TAC, when testing i1Profiler I realised that it won’t allow you to generate a profile with a TAC higher than that of the data set. You can’t create a profile from the 52 data that exceeds 280% TAC. Regards -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
Martin,
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?
What do you mean? ——————————— ECI profile round trip Using the FOGRA52 ECI profile with relative colorimetric intent I get 60.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.404592 0.319606 0.277260 0.159097 [CMYK] 50.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.516231 0.416335 0.338695 0.322331 [CMYK] 40.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.654292 0.527596 0.382775 0.585379 [CMYK] 30.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.991366 0.640319 0.405984 0.959954 [CMYK] When I now check which colour results from this CMYK (so doing icclu -ff -ia) I get: 0.400000 0.320000 0.280000 0.160000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 55.776221 1.765123 -6.388393 [Lab] 0.510000 0.410000 0.330000 0.320000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 46.607086 1.472108 -5.911079 [Lab] 0.650000 0.520000 0.380000 0.580000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 37.074239 1.163277 -4.468112 [Lab] 0.990000 0.640000 0.400000 0.960000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 28.472357 1.044766 -0.644196 [Lab] The result for CIELAB 30/0/0 could be called neutral (in terms of being close to a*=b*=0) but already the result from 40/0/0 is what I’d call bluish. ——————————— Other FOGRA52 ICC profile round trip Doing the same with a profile made with a different profiler I get 60.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.192258 0.139751 0.077765 0.434442 [CMYK] 50.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.282647 0.195927 0.087893 0.587088 [CMYK] 40.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.486236 0.319710 0.111802 0.740444 [CMYK] 30.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 1.000000 0.637776 0.260741 0.924599 [CMYK] and 0.192200 0.139000 0.077000 0.434000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 55.783325 1.637784 -6.614620 [Lab] 0.283000 0.196000 0.088000 0.587000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 46.345132 1.563961 -5.723870 [Lab] 0.486000 0.320000 0.112000 0.740000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 37.031277 1.421238 -4.754050 [Lab] 1.000000 0.638000 0.261000 0.925000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 28.975247 1.187015 -1.881533 [Lab] If we compare the results for mapping CIELAB grey relative colorimetric we get delta-b* values for 30/0/0 -> -1.24 40/0/0 -> +0.2 50/0/0 -> -0.3 60/0/0 -> -0.2 So a very similar result compared to the ECI profile, not? Another story is if you like the result or not. As Andy pointed out, relative colorimetric in ICC language means that all colours are scaled to the media white point in CIEXYZ space. In other words, there seems to be an underlying assumption that the paper white point gets the adaptation white point and hence a grey balance following the mediarelative a*/b* axis is perceived as neutral. If I understand you correctly this is not matching your expectation. IMHO there is only one solution although you call it „voodoo“: You need to use a perceptual mapping that is mapping the grey axis to what you expect. BTW: Jürgen Seitz's example using a GMG DVL profile is nothing else than a perceptual mapping. If they followed the ICC rel.col. approach they’d have ended up with the same result. You could also bake this into an ICC profile. It’s about the mapping not the encoding. Example result of an ICC profile made from FOGRA52: 100.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.000000 0.000016 0.000026 0.000000 [CMYK] 90.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.014219 0.004111 0.055549 0.071615 [CMYK] 80.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.025515 0.004922 0.109531 0.161295 [CMYK] 70.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.030263 0.008299 0.120143 0.313838 [CMYK] 60.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.051484 0.022548 0.134936 0.467605 [CMYK] 50.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.093016 0.038174 0.155986 0.625049 [CMYK] 40.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.171849 0.072261 0.172990 0.757199 [CMYK] 30.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.267693 0.111687 0.179354 0.843397 [CMYK] 20.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.419455 0.176708 0.222435 0.915680 [CMYK] 10.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.615754 0.259249 0.289859 0.965992 [CMYK] 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [Lab] -> Lut -> 0.849600 0.357592 0.392777 0.999987 [CMYK] 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 93.500024 2.496975 -9.999705 [Lab] 0.014000 0.004000 0.056000 0.072000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 86.954369 1.180527 -4.501073 [Lab] 0.026000 0.005000 0.109000 0.161000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 79.905673 0.032551 -0.183074 [Lab] 0.030000 0.008000 0.120000 0.314000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 70.025270 -0.093927 0.018392 [Lab] 0.051000 0.022000 0.135000 0.468000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 60.028832 -0.028715 0.002454 [Lab] 0.093000 0.038000 0.160000 0.625000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 50.039013 -0.105061 0.249806 [Lab] 0.172000 0.072000 0.173000 0.757000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 41.834047 0.099612 -0.323106 [Lab] 0.268000 0.111000 0.179000 0.843000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 36.764165 0.140901 -0.566765 [Lab] 0.420000 0.180000 0.220000 0.915000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 33.077930 0.208292 -0.587383 [Lab] 0.615000 0.259000 0.290000 0.965000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 30.801452 0.080759 -0.418828 [Lab] 0.850000 0.360000 0.390000 1.000000 [CMYK] -> Lut -> 29.111992 0.092626 -0.211476 [Lab] Does this fit better to what you’d expect? Nice weekend Claas
participants (6)
-
Claas Bickeböller
-
Dan Bergstrom
-
Graeme Gill
-
Malcolm Mackenzie
-
Martin Orpen
-
Terence Wyse