+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 63

Thread: Complete profiling Tool

  1. #31
    Banned lolis is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    5
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Thank

    PanosJani i'l try it.

  2. #32
    Banned mae4444 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    20
    Thanks
    31
    Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts
    i use chromix and curve2

  3. #33
    aaron125
    Guest
    But neither Chromix (I'm guessing you actually mean) ColorThink or Curve 2 are a profile creation app as their core purpose & certainly neither app could be considered "Complete profiling Tool".

    What kind of printer/press/whatever are you using Curve 2 to calibrate or profile?

  4. #34
    Donor xavyer99 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts

    canon 12 colors

    Witch of this programs that you all discuss suports printers with 12 colors?. I have a canon ipf 8300 and after changing the ink the colors went craizy.

  5. #35
    Junior Member AlexRU is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by xavyer99 View Post
    Witch of this programs that you all discuss suports printers with 12 colors?. I have a canon ipf 8300 and after changing the ink the colors went craizy.
    With RIP you do not have craizy color.

  6. #36
    shampa
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by xavyer99 View Post
    Witch of this programs that you all discuss suports printers with 12 colors?. I have a canon ipf 8300 and after changing the ink the colors went craizy.
    If all the channels are independent then in is infeasable to create an accurate profile. Even with only 5 steps per channel it would need 250 million patches.

    Usually the RIP will be set up to smoothly transition between inks at certain points and then you profile as a CMYK or RGB device.

  7. #37
    aaron125
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shampa View Post
    If all the channels are independent then in is infeasable to create an accurate profile. Even with only 5 steps per channel it would need 250 million patches.

    Usually the RIP will be set up to smoothly transition between inks at certain points and then you profile as a CMYK or RGB device.
    The number of individual inks or channels has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the number of patches in a profile target (and you're actually referring to a linearization target if talking about steps per channel, not a profile target). Not sure what you mean about channels being independent as all channels are completely independent. The yellow (e.g.) never has anything to do with the black or cyan channels so every channel is independent.

    The most important consideration concerning the profile target is simply what colour space the profile is being created for, RGB, CMYK or n-channel. There could be just 4 inks or there could be 44 inks but the profile target will still have the same number of patches. Number of inks/channels makes absolutely no difference as the profile target is only concerned with the output, not what is on the input side.

    In reference to your Canon iPF8300, please tell me you did not use anything other than 100% genuine Canon inks. What do you actually mean by "after changing the ink"? What did you change it to? If you used any brand of 3rd party or replacement or non-genuine inks, that right there is your problem. Switch back to Canon inks & problem solved.

    Regarding profile applications, as above, the profile is only concerned with output, not what is happening on the input side because the same profile creation app will work with a 3 colour true-RGB printer, 4 colour CMYK printer or as many inks/colours as can be shoved into a printer (20, 30, more?) will still work.

    Really, a printer like your iPF8300 should be causing absolutely no problems at all & with such an expensive machine, any problems should be taken care of immediately by the Canon warranty & the place of purchase should be able to help with most any problems you run into.

    I'm very curious about the "changing the ink" which has caused your problems. Please elaborate on this.

  8. #38
    aaron125
    Guest
    What do you mean about the ancient SpectroEye "is the most recommended one"? It is so old now & has been far & away surpassed in quality & the speed is just horrendous, so incredibly slow. Many instruments today are far more consistent & much easier to use.

    Also, ceramic tiles can be extremely stable or not at all stable, it just depends on your reference point & how accurate/pedantic a person wants to be. For 99% of users I am sure BCRA ceramic tiles are very stable & they would never even need to think about the actual tile drifting. More than likely most instruments which are not 'lab grade' wouldn't even measure the drift of a ceramic tile.

  9. #39
    shampa
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    Not sure what you mean about channels being independent as all channels are completely independent. The yellow (e.g.) never has anything to do with the black or cyan channels so every channel is independent.
    Yes the yellow and black channels are independent, but the cyan and light cyan may not be. i.e. after linearisation the RIP may present them logically as parts of the same channel.

    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    The most important consideration concerning the profile target is simply what colour space the profile is being created for, RGB, CMYK or n-channel. There could be just 4 inks or there could be 44 inks but the profile target will still have the same number of patches. Number of inks/channels makes absolutely no difference as the profile target is only concerned with the output, not what is on the input side.
    Yes the profile is concerned with output, therefore it has to sample the device space. And the device space increases exponentially as the number of channels increase. To be fair, there are probably considerable sections that can be ignored e.g. anything going over a certain ink limit. But 12 channels is still too many to practically sample.

  10. #40
    aaron125
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shampa View Post
    Yes the yellow and black channels are independent, but the cyan and light cyan may not be. i.e. after linearisation the RIP may present them logically as parts of the same channel.
    That has nothing to do with the printer in question, it is purely a function of the driver/RIP controlling the printer. The individual ink channels are always 100% independent, one never has anything to do with the other. Each & every channel always has the ability to output whatever the control signal tells it to, no matter what any other channel is doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by shampa View Post
    Yes the profile is concerned with output, therefore it has to sample the device space. And the device space increases exponentially as the number of channels increase. To be fair, there are probably considerable sections that can be ignored e.g. anything going over a certain ink limit. But 12 channels is still too many to practically sample.
    The device space does not increase exponentially at all when adding ink channels. Consider CMY & CMYK; there is no huge, massive, exponential increase in device space just because another ink was added. The device space increases linearly, not exponentially. Have a look at an Epson 8-ink device space gamut & an HP 11-ink or Canon 12-ink device space gamut & they most certainly are not exponentially larger than the Epson space, in fact, they are only marginally larger in some areas & a bit larger in others. But not exponentially larger anywhere.

    How can 12 inks be too many to practically sample? If that was the case, how could anyone produce profiles for Canon's printers, or even Canon include canned profiles? Your statement just doesn't make sense.

  11. Your ad here

  12. #41
    shampa
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    That has nothing to do with the printer in question, it is purely a function of the driver/RIP controlling the printer. The individual ink channels are always 100% independent, one never has anything to do with the other. Each & every channel always has the ability to output whatever the control signal tells it to, no matter what any other channel is doing.
    The printer is not applying the profile, the driver/RIP is. And the RIP will usually combine channels into logical channels before profiling. I don't know the ins and outs of every RIP. Some may let you use a 12 channel device-N profile, but I still maintain that is completely impractical

    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    The device space does not increase exponentially at all when adding ink channels. Consider CMY & CMYK; there is no huge, massive, exponential increase in device space just because another ink was added. The device space increases linearly, not exponentially. Have a look at an Epson 8-ink device space gamut & an HP 11-ink or Canon 12-ink device space gamut & they most certainly are not exponentially larger than the Epson space, in fact, they are only marginally larger in some areas & a bit larger in others. But not exponentially larger anywhere.

    How can 12 inks be too many to practically sample? If that was the case, how could anyone produce profiles for Canon's printers, or even Canon include canned profiles? Your statement just doesn't make sense.
    Yes it is exponential. It's basic maths. Adding a channel adds another dimension to the device space. A 10 unit line sampled at 1 unit intervals has 10 points. A 10x10 square sampled at 1 unit intervals has 100 points. A 10x10x10 cube sampled at 1U has 1000 points.

    This has nothing to do with gamut, which increases very little for each additional channel once you go past 3 channels with well placed primaries.

    The only reason 12 inks can be profiled is because they are combined into fewer logical channels, and because the profiling apps leave out parts of device space that are unlikely to significantly increase gamut and/or are unusable for reasons like ink limits. (e.g. they wouldn't make a patch with all 12 channels at 100%)

  13. #42
    aaron125
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shampa View Post
    Yes it is exponential. It's basic maths. Adding a channel adds another dimension to the device space. A 10 unit line sampled at 1 unit intervals has 10 points. A 10x10 square sampled at 1 unit intervals has 100 points. A 10x10x10 cube sampled at 1U has 1000 points.
    Each channel does not equate to an added dimension because matt black, photo black, light black, grey, etc are all on the same axis. They are all the same base ink (except matt black), just at different dilutions so that light black might be (e.g.) 60% dilution of photo black & grey might be a 30% dilution. Same goes for cyan/light, magenta/light & if you consider perhaps red or blue, they are just adding slightly to magenta or cyan. Even Epson's orange is used mainly to have even less of a visible grain pattern, not to add an entire new dimension, wholesale.

    Quote Originally Posted by shampa View Post
    This has nothing to do with gamut, which increases very little for each additional channel once you go past 3 channels with well placed primaries.
    Surely you're joking, right? Where have you seen a 3-ink printer, no matter how well those inks are positioned, that will be comparable to a current Epson 8 or 10 or Canon 12 ink printer's gamut please show me which device is able to do this. Even if it could get to within 75% of the gamut of a current fine art printer I would definitely like to see who makes such a machine. Why would any company waste their time & put millions of dollars into research if just 3 inks were enough? Even for the normal home or office user a black channel is required & how exactly would you even get a decent black or many dark, saturated colours with only 3 inks?

    Quote Originally Posted by shampa View Post
    The only reason 12 inks can be profiled is because they are combined into fewer logical channels, and because the profiling apps leave out parts of device space that are unlikely to significantly increase gamut and/or are unusable for reasons like ink limits. (e.g. they wouldn't make a patch with all 12 channels at 100%)
    Profiling apps don't "leave out parts of device space". They use exactly what is presented to them. As I explained above, the various inks are doubling & tripling up on each other, used mainly to have no grain patterns showing & to expand gamut slightly in some regions. But the profiling apps definitely are not leaving anything out or making arbitrary decisions about which ink it thinks is "unlikely to significantly increase gamut". Which profiling program are you aware of that behaves in such a way, I know I have never seen or heard of an app working in this manner.

    I'm curious, why are you so much against multi-ink printers & multi-ink printing in general? Do you not like the incredible prints which can be output with the current technology? Would you prefer everything to be dull & lifeless & with huge, horrible grain patterns throughout a print? Also the huge vibrant gamut of the current printers allows for some beautiful images to be printed which previously just looked wrong because the colours being output to paper were nothing like either the original colours or what the artist had envisioned the final output to look like. I know that even in my own library of images, I can remember not being able to print extremely saturated or vibrant colours which occur in natural settings such as flowers, insects, landscapes, sunsets, etc. which I just simply could not reproduce on paper to a level that satisfied me or comes close to what the original colours were like. Now, with the current technology I am able to achieve most of those previously unattainable hues & with vibrant, saturated detail.

  14. #43
    shampa
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    Each channel does not equate to an added dimension because matt black, photo black, light black, grey, etc are all on the same axis. They are all the same base ink (except matt black), just at different dilutions so that light black might be (e.g.) 60% dilution of photo black & grey might be a 30% dilution. Same goes for cyan/light, magenta/light & if you consider perhaps red or blue, they are just adding slightly to magenta or cyan. Even Epson's orange is used mainly to have even less of a visible grain pattern, not to add an entire new dimension, wholesale.
    I believe you misunderstand what device space is. It is simply the range of combinations of ink that can be physically put down. So adding another ink certainly does add another dimension.

    It has nothing to do with colour gamut. You could put the same ink in two tanks and it would still add a dimension in device space even though colour gamut stays almost the same (it may increase slightly since you can reach stronger densities)

    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    Surely you're joking, right? Where have you seen a 3-ink printer, no matter how well those inks are positioned, that will be comparable to a current Epson 8 or 10 or Canon 12 ink printer's gamut please show me which device is able to do this. Even if it could get to within 75% of the gamut of a current fine art printer I would definitely like to see who makes such a machine. Why would any company waste their time & put millions of dollars into research if just 3 inks were enough? Even for the normal home or office user a black channel is required & how exactly would you even get a decent black or many dark, saturated colours with only 3 inks?
    No I am not joking. 3 colour inkjets were common for a long time. They mostly produced decent colour but the dark shadows were muddy. The main reasons they died out is because black ink is a big advantage when printing text and the cost of the additional printhead came down. But compared to similar class CMYK inkjets of the time, the colour gamut was not that much smaller.

    So adding the 4th ink, black, has a modest increase in gamut - in the dark tones. Then, adding light cyan and magenta gives a very small increase in gamut - in the light saturated colours. Light/very light black probably don't add to the gamut at all. Orange/Green/Red/Purple/Blue add a modest amount in their respective saturated areas.

    Note that small doesn't mean insignificant. Those increases in gamut can be very significant if you are trying to print detail in those areas or if a target colour must be met. And obviously there are other advantages besides increased gamut such as increased smoothness and blacks that match the sheen of the paper.

    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    Profiling apps don't "leave out parts of device space". They use exactly what is presented to them. As I explained above, the various inks are doubling & tripling up on each other, used mainly to have no grain patterns showing & to expand gamut slightly in some regions. But the profiling apps definitely are not leaving anything out or making arbitrary decisions about which ink it thinks is "unlikely to significantly increase gamut". Which profiling program are you aware of that behaves in such a way, I know I have never seen or heard of an app working in this manner.
    I presume that statement is just your misunderstanding of what device space is. Profiling apps do leave out large areas of device space but try to not leave out any of the device colour gamut.

    Quote Originally Posted by aaron125 View Post
    I'm curious, why are you so much against multi-ink printers & multi-ink printing in general? Do you not like the incredible prints which can be output with the current technology? Would you prefer everything to be dull & lifeless & with huge, horrible grain patterns throughout a print? Also the huge vibrant gamut of the current printers allows for some beautiful images to be printed which previously just looked wrong because the colours being output to paper were nothing like either the original colours or what the artist had envisioned the final output to look like. I know that even in my own library of images, I can remember not being able to print extremely saturated or vibrant colours which occur in natural settings such as flowers, insects, landscapes, sunsets, etc. which I just simply could not reproduce on paper to a level that satisfied me or comes close to what the original colours were like. Now, with the current technology I am able to achieve most of those previously unattainable hues & with vibrant, saturated detail.
    Where did you get the idea I was against multi-ink printers? They do produce great results, and the extra inks are worth it in many cases.
    But the RIPs are currently still quite immature in dealing with colour beyond CMYK and that partly has to do with the huge size of device space. It is important to know both the benefits and limitations so you can get the best out of them.

  15. #44
    Junior Member yura is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    I use Profile Maker, and are normally happy with the same profile, with many of the requirements

  16. #45
    Junior Member chinamonk is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    GMG COLORPROOF is a good choice.EFI COLORPROOF based on ICC output modalities have limitations, may cause problems too much, do not recommend the use of.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Kodak PDF Cropping Tool (Plugin) for Acrobat
    By Bozoid in forum Requests
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-23-2011, 05:13 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-02-2011, 03:45 PM
  3. Classic Tool PAge MAker 7
    By ChristianSTG in forum Classic Tools
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-04-2011, 10:30 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-26-2010, 05:45 AM
  5. SysInfoTools PDF Repair Tool v1.0
    By worker in forum Full Software
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-23-2010, 07:53 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts