Profiling pro 9500 to Image Specialist inks

[Emulator]

I came across an interesting image at:-
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgu...fjUcfBEpCT0AXM6oCICg&ved=0CGQQ9QEwBw&dur=1281

When viewed in the Web Browser in sRGB it looks good, bring it into PS and view it in Adobe RGB and it looks very impressive. However it may be more natural in sRGB.

I used ColorMunki in Profile Optimizer mode to use the image and optimize my existing profile for some micro porous luster paper.

The improvement in colour saturation of the print was even more impressive.

The CM software numerical manipulation is very clever, for such minimal effort on the part of the user.

 

[rodbam]

That's interesting Emu. I have used some of the downloadable test charts with various shots in one print to optimise my profiles & have never thought about using a shot to get specific colourings. Food for thought a.

 

[jtoolman]

The optimizing process in the Colormunki is meant for you to optimize an existing profile for a paper / printer / ink combination so that you can optimize it to a specific image that you want to print. This would be an image you really need to print as true as possible (as the optimized profile
which you should save as a different name so as to not overwrite the original profile ) in order to be able to reproduce the actual color values of that image as close as possible.

I usually run an optimization by loading a 1200 color patch target image.
My results have been truly great.
I have been able to remove the last trace of a color cast that would be produced with the un optimized profile.
Not really noticeable on general color prints but definitely visible on B&W work where you can easily discern a color cast or non linear neutrality when shadows may be cool, middle tones neutral and lighter grays possibly warm.

Non only is this really necessary when you have a printer paper combo where 3rd party inks are used and simply cannot be used to print B&W with the ABW option, but even on a single black ink printer such as the R1900 and R2000 that have traditionally not been thought of as being great B&W printers.

I consistently achieve perfectly neutral ( to my eye ) on my R2000 and I am currently running OCP inks on it.

Joe

 

[rodbam]

Yes I saw that on one of the Colourmunki videos where the photographer used a B&W file he wanted to print & he used that to optimise his profile. I used a B&W test patch from the net thinking it would have a better tonal range than one of my files. I used to notice the colour casts on the pro9000 sometimes when printing with the greyscale box ticked some slightly magenta & some slightly greenish but with the pro9500 I leave it set on colour for my B&Ws & they look very neutral to me, I'm really happy with it.

 

[Emulator]

Hi Rod & Joe

It is interesting Joe that you feel that optimisation overwrites the existing profile content, do you think it removes some existing content? Or does it just add new points in the curves. Clearly, I agree you need to save it under a new file name, I usually put the date at the start of the name.

Looking at profile file size, on my last optimisation, it increased from 2416KB to 2451KB. Each optimisation seems to add varying amounts to the file size.

I imagined, but may be wrong, that the process was additive, i.e. the more you optimised, the more points you added to the curves (or semi straight lines?).

Do the profiles get better and better for any image, the more optimisation you do?

Yes, Rod, I find the same with B&W images on the 9000 II, but I must admit I have not pursued B&W optimisation as yet.

Regards

Emu

 

[jtoolman]

Hi Rod & Joe

It is interesting Joe that you feel that optimisation overwrites the existing profile content, do you think it removes some existing content? Or does it just add new points in the curves. Clearly, I agree you need to save it under a new file name, I usually put the date at the start of the name.

Looking at profile file size, on my last optimisation, it increased from 2416KB to 2451KB. Each optimisation seems to add varying amounts to the file size.

I imagined, but may be wrong, that the process was additive, i.e. the more you optimised, the more points you added to the curves (or semi straight lines?).

Do the profiles get better and better for any image, the more optimisation you do?

Yes, Rod, I find the same with B&W images on the 9000 II, but I must admit I have not pursued B&W optimisation as yet.

Regards

Emu

It does not overwrite it if you save it under a modified name. I add the word optimized and I then end up with both profiles stored.
I use the same images used to profile papers with units that use 1000 plus color patches.
Currently I use 1200 color and 1200 black to white patch images.

 

[rodbam]

I haven't renamed my optimised profiles because I thought I read that optimising doesn't overwrite the previous one it just adds more information. I need more reading I think

 

[jtoolman]

It add information on itself!!!! Unless you same it AS, it will overwrite the previous version. After all it's just a file!!!
Trust me!!

 

[Emulator]

I think we are talking about two different issues, as Joe says a file is a file, if you resave under the same name it will totally overwrite the original saved version.

But if you optimise a profile, do you overwrite all its original content? I do not think so, there would be no point in loading an existing profile to optimise, if you are starting from scratch each time. I think the process must be cumulative with multiple optimisations.

A simple test to try Joe. Create an image file containing a single colour and use it to optimise your B/W linearised profile. Will the process reset your previous optimisation? I don't think it will, it will just add a small change related to that single colour.

So I think optimisation is a cumulative process and the more you do, the more "adjusted" the profile becomes.

 

[jtoolman]

I think we are talking about two different issues, as Joe says a file is a file, if you resave under the same name it will totally overwrite the original saved version.

But if you optimise a profile, do you overwrite all its original content? I do not think so, there would be no point in loading an existing profile to optimise, if you are starting from scratch each time. I think the process must be cumulative with multiple optimisations.

A simple test to try Joe. Create an image file containing a single colour and use it to optimise your B/W linearised profile. Will the process reset your previous optimisation? I don't think it will, it will just add a small change related to that single colour.

So I think optimisation is a cumulative process and the more you do, the more "adjusted" the profile becomes.

I have done an optimization, load an existing profile. load the image from which your generate the 3rd print to scan and once finished, simple same it. It will of course add any new info to that original profile BUT is you same it you still only have one profile albeit, an "Optimized" one. Will that one be better than the original? Only printing answer that question. So that's why I never save back to the original. I always save it with the word Optimized added to the original name.
It's simply insurance. I can always load the original profile and if the optimized one fares better than I load that one when printing.

As to your second question. Yes it simply Optimizes or tweaks the original. You are not really creating a second individual profile. It is adding to the original.
Like when you load an image out of your memory card. You tweak it by editing and then you DO NOT save it back to the original. If you do same it, it just add the tweaks you performed during editing.

Joe