ArgyllCMS 648 patch target for i1 Pro 2 device.

[pharmacist]

After my recently purchased i1 Pro 2 device, I made this 648 patch target to be printed on a single sheet of A4 (210x297 mm). Optimized to be used with the dedicated ruler/jigg of the I1 Pro 2 device. The modified target has a clear black marker line with a white area on the paper surface to start the spectrophotometer from and ends with a same white area to end the reading (start scanning from the left white area to the other white area). The target has an entry form to fill in date, type of paper, ink used, PK/MK, GO: yes/no, paper/media setting/resolution setting used to print this target, type of printer, profile name. This enables you to document this whole process.

It is based on 8^3=512 steps in each XYZ axis of the color space + 128 grey steps (with emphasis around the neutral axis to optimize neutral BW-printing) and 4 white and 4 black patches making in total 648 patches.

 

[Stormlight]

Since you are using argyllcms, I hope you did not buy the retail version. I am very happy with the rebranded version at 1/5 the price. On a 8.5x11 letter, I can get away with 1446 patches. I like to maximize the paper since it use the same amount of ink.

 

[Tony4597]

Since you are using argyllcms, I hope you did not buy the retail version. I am very happy with the rebranded version at 1/5 the price. On a 8.5x11 letter, I can get away with 1446 patches. I like to maximize the paper since it use the same amount of ink.

There is no retail version and there really should not be any rebranded versions. If you have paid for any version to any other than Graeme Gill (author) there is something very wrong. The software is provided FOC but the author fairly asks that you may consider donating even a small amount:
https://www.argyllcms.com/

If you are a casual or hobby user, then something like $5 - $100 may be appropriate, depending on how deep your pockets are.

If you are using ArgyllCMS in your business, an annual donation, of (say) 5-20% of the cost of the commercial software you have not had to pay for, would make a great deal of difference in ensuring that it continues to be available.

If you are distributing ArgyllCMS as part of some other free package, then please make your users aware of the need to support the software that you and they depend upon.

If you are distributing ArgyllCMS as part of some other package that you are make money out of (e.g., a commercial Linux distribution where ArgyllCMS is providing a feature that allows Linux to be on par with other operating systems with regard to Color Management), then it would help tremendously if you treated it like other key software you depend on, and make an allowance to contribute a portion of a full time developers salary every year.

No contribution is too small - it all adds up.

If there is an insufficient level of ongoing support, then there is still a very real possibility that you will return here in 6-12 months time, and find ArgyllCMS has gone.

Have to ask what exactly was the quoted price and the price of the rebrand at 1/5 cost?

 

[pharmacist]

I think Stormlight means the rebranded X-rite device (EFI ES-2000): Don't worry I bought it for a fraction of the price and it was almost brand new (backup from a photographer.

 

[Tony4597]

I think Stormlight means the rebranded X-rite device (EFI ES-2000): Don't worry I bought it for a fraction of the price and it was almost brand new (backup from a photographer.

Ahh, that makes sense now!

I have seen ridiculous asking prices recently on eBay for either the EFI or X Rite. Also some sellers seem to be somewhat economical with the truth i.e. they claim working units due to diagnostic tests but fail to mention that any software will require a licence to run either X Rite or EFI software and without the licence the unit is a brick as far as makers software goes. OEM software only is pretty close to purchase price of the whole kit

When I sold my ES 1000 I went to great lengths to explain exactly what was being sold had no licence even though diagnostic test passed. I also included links to Argyllcms and two different GUI front ends my favourite being [color]profiler. Got a lot of questions from buyers that had been burned and of course pointed them towards Argyllcms

 

[Stormlight]

Yes, sorry. I should had been more explicit. Was on my tablet thus trying to make a quick point. I bought my EFI ES2000 for $300 used but in pristine condition in 2019. It came with everything including the tab slider and filter. After buying it, I learning more about the licensing limitation and been using argyllcms since. Here are some of my notes for syntax to maximize the number of patches per sheet. Considering I bought my i1DisplayPro2 (2018) for $200, this is a steal for 2019!

4x6 with -L -a .6 1518 5 sheets
8.5x11 with -L -a .6 1446 persheet
13x19 with -L 1218 per sheet
Letter with -L 504 per sheet
13x24 with -L 1554 per sheet
13x19 with -L -a .7 2569 per sheet

I use LittleArgyllGUI for the front-end but still the manually mess with the syntax. For display, I use Xrite or DisplayCAL.

I strongly believe all serious printer user should custom calibrated because I get much better gamut than stock ICC or from ink seller (5%-15% gain on gamut). It also pay it off itself by allowing you to buy cheap photo paper (especially old papers on Craigslist ) and outperform the gamut on the more expensive paper. Cheap as in $15 for 50 13x19 or $3 for 500 (5x7) etc...

Btw, I recommend to put a few desiccant bags into your case to keep moisture out! I do that to all my gears!

 

[The Hat]

I strongly believe all serious printer user should custom calibrated

I must strongly interrupt you here..

Because the majority of inkjet printer users wont use or will ever need to use a calibrating device, the standard built-in printer profiles are more than capable of meeting their everyday needs even on cheaper photo papers..

 

[Stormlight]

Okay, you are correct for being precise! I did not mean calibrated the printer but have it profile to each specific photo paper. Calibrate at the printer or profile yield at the same result. Profile is just a external offset of what had been calibrated at hardware level. I meant to say calibrated result! As with any "serious" printer user, accuracy of their printing should be a concern. Plus, generic profile does not apply when you go off brand or looking for performance from cheap photo paper. To be frank, I still have Fry's $1 photo paper from early 2000s, lol. At least, I know its performance for certain print. I have tried sample of various well reputable paper brand and their performance is way subpar to cheap photo paper. I will not note names here but they are quite well praised among the "users" lol! Thus, I strongly recommend profile all photo papers. Else, it is a waste of "quality" photo papers and photo inks: more money to the wallet! If a print is casual, a 4-color printer on plain paper work is fine with generic profile/automatic adjustment. If plain paper does not give enough of a gloss, I will just give them the color laser print on plain paper. Overall, I deal with tough folks and get a lot of critiques on print thus accurate of editting to print is critical. To say the least, I even get critique on two different monitors and bothly are recently calibrated to sRGB but one produce a lighter tone in one area of the picture than the other screen. Yes, both monitors are 10-bits and +100% sRGB! https://www.iccview.de/ is a good site if you ever need to compare your gamut (profiles). I stand by my opinion!

Btw, I do warm my monitors to +45min before calibrating profiling and dry my patches at least 24 hours before scanning them!

Edit:
I want to note that this is for photo papers in general and for not specialty paper like fabric, metallic or print on metal. Those I would rely on the generic profile from the associated media provider or test/trial approach! Trust me, profiling on those yield very very poor result lol! Sometime you gotta learn the hard way!

 

[Tony4597]

I think it is worth stating that sRGB is a colour space not a setting on a monitor neither are monitors calibrated to sRGB nor any other colour space. sRGB represents a fairly narrow range of colours and is based on a theoretical display using a particular set of phosphors, I believe P22.

Monitors are not calibrated to sRGB or any other particular colour space.
Monitors have their gamut (often referred to as Native) which would be my recommendation for initial photo editing. Once calibrated and profiled in a correctly colour managed workflow ICC aware applications and documents will display correctly (within device limitations) within the documents tagged colour space

 

[The Hat]

As with any "serious" printer user, accuracy of their printing should be a concern. Plus, generic profile does not apply when you go off brand or looking for performance from cheap photo paper.

I don’t calibrate my monitor or use profiles for any of my work or photos, does that make me an idiot, or just lucky, I have spent a long time in the print industry and colour was never an issue, more like a natural way of life..