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

[Ink stained Fingers]

I hoped you have an explanation for it - I won't scan through the raw data for that.

 

[marco565]

when I use a spotread command for argy on a back spot (check with ti2 which one is real black) for a mate paper it gave to me:
Mate paper

Result is XYZ: 2.067605 2.108082 1.631021, D50 Lab: 16.044522 0.787977 1.167705
ISO Vis, Type 1, Type 2 Density: 1.671918 1.717082 1.709664
Status A CMYV Density: 1.651931 1.683854 1.698583 1.671918
Status M CMYV Density: 1.644107 1.682313 1.702371 1.671918
Status T CMYV Density: 1.657960 1.684789 1.706097 1.671918
Status E CMYV Density: 1.657963 1.684789 1.704516 1.671918

for this cheap glossy paper:

Result is XYZ: 0.600066 0.614320 0.914409, D50 Lab: 5.549128 0.312408 -7.440224
ISO Vis, Type 1, Type 2 Density: 2.229247 1.825910 1.881111
Status A CMYV Density: 2.287875 2.149279 1.903173 2.229247
Status M CMYV Density: 2.146243 2.181204 1.939790 2.229247
Status T CMYV Density: 2.344884 2.147038 1.965591 2.229247
Status E CMYV Density: 2.345287 2.147038 1.905504 2.229247

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Lab 16 0,79 1,17 for a matte paper is typical, Lab 5,5 0,31 -7,44 is pretty good for a glossy paper, and how does that compare to profiles with the i1Studio ?

 

[marco565]

I don't have the values of the xrite application it's I1 studio so I can not get everything from there.

Looking at the test prints of the cheap glossy paper, the Xrite profiles look better.

I guess they must have a pretty good algorithm that with few patches they can more or less determine the gamut of the printer.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I don't have the values of the xrite application it's I1 studio so I can not get everything from there.

The functionality of the i1Studio is rather limited in this respect, but you can load the 2 profiles for this glossy paper - with argyllCMS or i1Studio - into the profile viewer and look to the bottom tip - the black point - how close are they and which one is lower and by how much.
I don't know if there is a free version of ColorThink by Chromix available, this let you do a readout for the media black point which is embedded in the file header parameters.

I guess they must have a pretty good algorithm that with few patches they can more or less determine the gamut of the printe

Determining the gamut is the easy part - it's just a question where the corner points of the RGB color space are mapped to , you can easily determine the gamut with a patch sheet with 50 patch fields. It's more complex with the control points inside the color space - all those which you don't see, and to calculate the correct input to output color relations - as well in the reverse direction, that's some 3D matrix interpolations and inversions.

 

[marco565]

I just found it! Basically is the mac viewer that is not good, with Gamut vision the profile look more or less the same (slight advantage for the Argy one in terms of volume)

I think we should consider to NOT TRUST COLOR SYNC from macOS.


I just discovered this when I did an ICC profile for the canon matte MP101 for the ET8550 using i1 studio and then compared it to the Canon pro 10 original canon profile for this paper.

Obviously the LAB value on a Mat paper can not be 0. So I suspected something.


EDIT:
Here you see in gamut vision (on my pc) the shape of the 2 profiles (the solid one is the profile)

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Obviously the LAB value on a Mat paper can not be 0. So I suspected something.

That's indeed a good indication that something is wrong.
The gamutvision displays are quite close together now - that makes sense, but I'm not familar at all with color mgmt, profiling etc in the Mac environment. It's a pity that Gamutvision does not display the black point value but only the paper white point in the parameter display.

 

[marco565]

Hi, Guys I wanted to share a discovery that I made recently, while trying out my new guide I discovered this:

On a very BIG pink patch (applies to white also, so far I have tested 2):

Without ruler:
Result is XYZ: 60.946693 42.311576 46.983188, D50 Lab: 71.085207 53.738058 -15.637152
ISO Vis, Type 1, Type 2 Density: 0.317025 0.191987 0.209616

With wide ruler (8.5mm):
Result is XYZ: 61.627558 42.880314 47.958136, D50 Lab: 71.473662 53.655687 -16.106289
ISO Vis, Type 1, Type 2 Density: 0.311847 0.185622 0.201999

With Narrow ruler (6.5mm):
Result is XYZ: 61.214764 42.538905 47.616461, D50 Lab: 71.240890 53.695225 -16.110263
ISO Vis, Type 1, Type 2 Density: 0.315108 0.188330 0.204875


There is a slight increase in bleu by 0.5 when using a ruler. Now I am wondering if that is OK. Test prints look good.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Is there anything different when you do the patch reading with or without the rulers - e.g. distance between the aperture of the spectro to the patch or a slight tilt of the spectro or some other mechanical difference ?

 

[marco565]

The size of a thin mate paper is added I guess is 0.15mm not sure that is what makes the difference. In my opinion is more due tu the refection of the light in the guide (even if it’s black) that might somehow have an impact.
The case of the CM adds at least 0.7cm to the size of the device and this is used to hold on a screen, I guess the hight does not have a huge impact. But it might be a possibility.