A basic guide (see post #1) to setting up ARGYLL CMS profiling on your computer

[The Hat]

Is that a mahogany box or plastic?

Harrods, ? Plastic… ! NEVER..

 

[Emulator]

I have written a batch file CAP750.bat (see attached CAP750.txt (copy and paste into Argyll .bin folder and edit .txt to .bat to use)).

My objective is to streamline the creation of Argyll profiles by producing batch files for each target, by patch size. The .bat file size is only 5kB, so it is easier to create a .bat for each patch profile size by editing the parameters, than entering the data as you go. The command parameters in this case are borrowed from pharmacist work, but can be edited to your own choice, as you wish and the batch file given a new name.

If you feel inclined test the operation of this file, please advise any problems or success.
CAP750.txt

 

[mikling]

Just a quickie. I am able to get "only 756" patches using an i1Pro2. This requires half the size of targets as the prior generation of i1Pro devices and they must be read very carefully in addition it scans 200 times per second. I can't imagine how a ColorMunki device can reliably read these targets you guys are producing and give consistent results. What is the minimum aperture size the Munki needs and how fast does it scan?

The i1Pro2 device is also very picky on the cable used and will refuse to read reliably using a 9ft USB..pro cable from Belkin. Only the highest quality of USB cable directly connected to the USB port on the MB with a max 6 foot cable will give reliable reads. Front USB ports are a no no, the cables inside the computer upsets it.

Also when you can scan down into the dark regions, that is where the Munki is weakest because of the stray light aspect that the Pro2 device was designed to minimize....these were some of the reasons outined by the creator of Argyll that persuaded me to move up to get decent results.

So I wonder if you're hitting against hardware issues.

Batch files are great. I set up batch files so that the PC runs profiles for over 12 hours continuously using Argyll.

 

[RogerB]

@RogerB I think I read somewhere in Argyll notes that the "u" option should not be used in profiles and was only intended for testing.
I think it is a case of decreasing returns.
But it's all good fun.

Exactly!

 

[pharmacist]

HI Mike,

You might be right about hardware issues. Again: the errors seems in the darker regions of black (Determining D max) causing the problem. Other colors seems to be pretty consistent.

I think we should not try to crunch som much patches on a singele sheet for sake of reading accuracy. I think 648 patches should be sufficient to make satisfactory quality profiles. Trying to put too much patches on a single sheet does indeed give decreasing returns.

 

[Emulator]

Just a quickie. I am able to get "only 756" patches using an i1Pro2. This requires half the size of targets as the prior generation of i1Pro devices and they must be read very carefully in addition it scans 200 times per second. I can't imagine how a ColorMunki device can reliably read these targets you guys are producing and give consistent results. What is the minimum aperture size the Munki needs and how fast does it scan?................

Hi Mike,
I use a home made masked and guided patch reader as illustrated in post #22, with the ColorMunki Photo. I have very few reading errors, perhaps two on a 750 patch A4 sheet, usually my fault and easily corrected. The CM is using a front panel mounted USB port without problems. You probably noticed (if you have looked at the strings of options) it is using the i1 setting in printtarg rather than the CM setting, the notes suggest that you can achieve improved reading of smaller patches with the CM using the i1 setting!

During the writing of the batch file, I repeated the creation of the 750 target profile several times to test the file's development and inspecting the profiles in Gamutvision, they all appear very similar, if not identical, so I don't think there is a problem. There are aspects of the profile that are not good, but at least they are consistent.

The patches are laid out 25w x 30h and each is 8mm square when the target image is adjusted to fill the A4 page in PSE. The CM aperture in the casing is, I would say 7.5mm and the sensor, if you peer into the hole, somewhat smaller. The scan rate, I have seen quoted somewhere, but can't remember where, I think it is in the Argyll notes.

The mask (made out of A3 glossy microporous paper, mounted on 3/16 balsa) slot width is 8.5mm and in direct contact with the printed target, the CM is a close sliding fit in the guide and stopped physically at each end of the slide, to ensure correct starting and stopping positions. The shrouding effect of the guide allows less extraneous light to enter than would be the case when using the CM normally. The target print rests on a similar paper sheet glued to the back frame and is located up to a slight ridge at the top to help alignment.

Added later:-
One thing I must try, is making up an additional mask strip out of matt black paper with a slightly narrower slot, to put in above the existing white mask. It would also be possible to add black paper end flaps to totally exclude light from the CM. It will be interesting to compare performance.

 

[lowell374]

Anyone have a nice set of Argyll instructions for a Letter sized sheet? I have developed a 966 patch set, but it requires TWO letter sheets. The patches are, however, 8mm in width, which, as I understand are the minimum required for the Color Munki Photo. Actually, I've heard that the CMP is somewhat variable in it's width.
If there's any interest, or not, I will post my Windows batch file later. Then, as soon as I develop it, I will post my Linux script file. I usually run Linux.
Thanks to Emulator and others for their many good ideas.

 

[RogerB]

Hi Mike,
One thing I must try, is making up an additional mask strip out of matt black paper with a slightly narrower slot, to put in above the existing white mask. It would also be possible to add black paper end flaps to totally exclude light from the CM. It will be interesting to compare performance.

It may also be interesting to compare the results from the same target read using an i1Pro. That might answer the questions about possible hardware limitations when using the CM. Anyone care to send me their target?

 

[lowell374]

It may also be interesting to compare the results from the same target read using an i1Pro. That might answer the questions about possible hardware limitations when using the CM. Anyone care to send me their target?

Specs please. Is Letter size OK? 8mm size patches OK? ...

 

[Emulator]

It seems that most, if not all the Argyll profiles generated with the current chosen options, suffer from the dogleg near Dmax. (see image)

If you project the line past the dogleg it passes nicely through zero and would give a Dmax of zero, a very unlikely situation. So is this the ink/paper/printer running out of steam? Is Argyll trying hard to compensate? Incidentally in the image black point compensation is off, switching it on does not solve the problem, but it does improve it slightly by moving the whole line to the left, nearer the axis and shortening the horizontal section.

A more graceful curve would surely give better results when viewing a greyscale step chart or image with greys close to Dmax.

The more difficult question is can Argyll options compensate for this and if so which ones?

Edited in later:

Thinking about it a little more, perhaps the best objective is to aim for a straight line between 100% L and Dmax, as shown in this image by the orange line.



This would give a linear grey gradation down to Dmax and would require Argyll aiming for Dmax=2.14 rather than zero. A point that Argyll should know from chartread.