Search results

I don't think there is any easy way to profile a pure B&W printer using normal profiling software. I'm pretty sure that the Argyll documentation specifically states that it does not support this. QTR is by far the best way to go if you are mixing your own inks. Unless you were very lucky you...

Measuring a printer test chart is very different from profiling a camera. Clearly a camera profile needs to use the actual light source, but when we measure the chart with a spectrophotometer we are measuring the reflectance of each patch at specific wavelengths. True the light source needs to...

I'm not sure it's quite as simple as that. The reason for having profiles for different viewing illuminants is that the colour balance of some ink sets will vary with different illuminants but not all colours are affected to the same degree. There are quite a lot of posts in the forums where...

My constant reference is http://argyllcms.com/doc/ArgyllDoc.html If you go about 2/3rds the way down you will find links to detailed descriptions of every module. Very handy!

The i1Match license allows you to make custom profiles for individuals but not to distribute "generic" profiles - you do need a (very expensive) license for that. I believe that the license for the newer X-rite software, i1Profiler, are even more restrictive. I should say that I will not get...

I'm with you 100% there. That would guarantee that my kitten and puppy photos got the recognition they truly deserve!

I sometimes see this kind of problem when reading charts with my i1Pro and it's usually because two adjacent patches are too close in colour. (Colour differences can vary a lot between different printers/inks/papers.) If the colour difference is too small the software doesn't recognise the...

Works OK for me.

A very god result from the CM, apart from the peak error which looks as if it could be an outlier. Here's a result for a 529-patch chart (23 x 23) with a patch size of 7.3 x 9.7 mm. I think we are both at the point where the accuracy is more than adequate!

The file size generated by the batch file in question is down to the -T360 parameter. This gives a 16-bit, 360dpi TIFF. I agree with Grandad35 that 72dpi is sufficient for printing targets. although I personally use 180dpi for my Argyll targets simply because it makes the text look nicer! Even...

For the record, the targets that are used for the original i1Pro have 8mm patches and in fact the instrument is perfectly capable of reading 7mm patches with excellent repeatability. However, I do share your concern about making the patches too small. I think new users of Argyll should be aware...

If anyone is interested in running profile verification tests using my batch file ArgProf#2 I thought I should provide suitable image and reference files. I use a 288-patch chart which is a modification of a profiling target. It is modified so that all of the colours lie within the gamut of my...

I've had enough of batch file writing for now, so the attached is my final effort. It now has two additions: a) An option to specify a different illuminant when generating the profile. If you use dye inks and you know that your prints will be viewed under tungsten illumination then selecting "A"...

Just for completeness I thought I would look at the errors for the Low quality setting in profgen. Not surprisingly, the accuracy is not as good, although I suspect that many people would be perfectly happy with this accuracy in "real" prints.

I use MeasureTool which is part of the x-Rite ProfileMaker suite. You can download it (free!) from http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx?ID=1225&Action=support&SoftwareID=931 When you run the installation program you can select just MeasureTool to install. The main modules need a dongle to...

Exactly! I'm sure it's nothing to do with the uploading process. The fact is that the errors here are, for the most part, simply not detectable to the eye. Here's and enlarged portion of the patch with the biggest error, which is detectable. And just as an example this is how the comparison...