Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Eye One Photo Profiles with Current Epsons  (Read 11234 times)
Stephen Best
Guest
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2006, 11:52:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A free download? It's usually over $500. What is the Logo Colorful table? I have the i1 Photo Package, and just updated to Match v3.6.1.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Download PM5 from here:

   [a href=\"http://www.gretagmacbeth.com/index/support/support-center-list.htm]http://www.gretagmacbeth.com/index/support...center-list.htm[/url]

MeasureTool needs a dongle for full functionality, but without it you can still do measurements and compare them, but not average them. It's more flexible than using Match and works great with Bill's targets. You just then feed the (chosen) output measurement file to Match.

"LOGO Colorful" is a gamut mapping option introduced with PM5. It defines the tables for Perceptual rendering. It's now the default (and only) option for Match. Just about any profiling package will generate much the same tables for Colorimetric so what distinguishes one from another is the quality of their Perceptual tables. With PM 5.05 (and later) or Match 3.6 (and later) you can now use Perceptual for most output, except where absolute colours are important (such as portraits). You can evaluate the quality of the rendering with soft proofing in Photoshop. Turn BPC on or off, whichever gives you the best results (you'll have to test this for each paper you use). Perceptual rendering will generally result in more shadow detail than Rel. Col. with BPC on.

Your Eye-One kit is a killer package. Learning how to get the best from it will save you heaps in printer/paper churn!
« Last Edit: December 14, 2006, 12:02:06 AM by Stephen Best » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8581



WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 14, 2006, 08:09:31 AM »
ReplyReply

EyeOne Match uses the Colorful option by default (you can't turn it off).
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
mdelrossi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 25, 2007, 01:26:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm new to all this, so if you can help I'd appreciate it.
How do you create the profile with a txt file?
I have to go through all the steps calibrate, read swatches, etc… before I get to create profile.
I'm using Eye-One photo that I'm renting. Iwas able to profile 6 papers and It's just amazing how well the all match each other, and the monitor.
This averaging technique sounds interesting, and I'd like to try it.
thanks for your help
mdr
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8581



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 26, 2007, 10:04:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm new to all this, so if you can help I'd appreciate it.
How do you create the profile with a txt file?
I have to go through all the steps calibrate, read swatches, etc… before I get to create profile.
I'm using Eye-One photo that I'm renting. Iwas able to profile 6 papers and It's just amazing how well the all match each other, and the monitor.
This averaging technique sounds interesting, and I'd like to try it.
thanks for your help
mdr
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97528\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Forget the averaging for ink jets, it's a big waste of time. If you're profiling an older printing press that shows deviations across the sheet then yes, measure targets that you've placed in all orientations (up,down,left,right) to fill the sheet, average that and the press run from start, middle and finish. This is a variable process! An ink jet is a very stable process.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3855



WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2007, 03:39:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Forget the averaging for ink jets, it's a big waste of time. If you're profiling an older printing press that shows deviations across the sheet then yes, measure targets that you've placed in all orientations (up,down,left,right) to fill the sheet, average that and the press run from start, middle and finish. This is a variable process! An ink jet is a very stable process.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The inkjet is stable. The user's hand is not. You've been spoiled by your friend Isis
A guy using the i1 SDK once told me "doing a single (unchecked) reading with an i1 is suicidal".
Also, I'm not so sure that the Canons and HPs are so stable across the page. As the heads heat, problems may occur. Epsons are Piezo, as we all know, so inherently do not have this issue.

Edmund
« Last Edit: January 27, 2007, 03:43:15 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
Stephen Best
Guest
« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2007, 04:18:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The inkjet is stable. The user's hand is not.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97832\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed. Which is why I use Atkinson's graduated targets (bad patches stick out), read the target three times and take the best one. On odd occasions I'll actually edit the measurement file and fix a bad patch or two. It would be great to have software to do this, but I'm not prepared to pay what GM want for full MeasureTool functionality. I just did this for a new profile and the second and third readings were very close. I then just used whichever of these two was closest to the odd man out. MeasureTool's comparison function is really nifty.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8581



WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 27, 2007, 04:42:29 PM »
ReplyReply

It's you time....

There is error checking. The EyeOne does 100 samples a second so you had better have a stroke while measuring to warrant all the additional time doing this multiple times and averaging. But if it makes you feel better, by all means do so.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Stephen Best
Guest
« Reply #27 on: January 27, 2007, 04:54:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's you time....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97838\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

True enough ... but I'm not doing profiles commercially. If I did, I'd have a table. To read a 1728 patch target three times, compare and generate the profile took me about 30 minutes. Prior to this I spent a couple of hours doing media type and color density selection. Plus the overnight drydown. I use few papers but want the absolute best I can get from them.
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 27, 2007, 05:28:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm careful about measurement technique; making sure there isn't a colored surface under the paper to bleed through and skew the results (this ruins a lot of homemade profiles) making sure there isn't dust bunnies or paper dust on the charts to skew the readings, moving the spectro at a slow steady speed, etc. I haven't encountered enough variation between measurements to make averaging multiple measurement sessions worthwhile. But if you want to, it's your time, and you aren't likely to hurt anything.
Logged

John Moody
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #29 on: January 29, 2007, 08:51:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The inkjet is stable. The user's hand is not. You've been spoiled by your friend Isis
A guy using the i1 SDK once told me "doing a single (unchecked) reading with an i1 is suicidal".
Also, I'm not so sure that the Canons and HPs are so stable across the page. As the heads heat, problems may occur. Epsons are Piezo, as we all know, so inherently do not have this issue.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97832\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Less heat than thermal, but I was led to believe the occasional ink dumps in the middle of a print was Epson's way to cool the heads.
Logged
CLasser
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #30 on: February 03, 2007, 07:51:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The current version of Eye-One Match will read targets larger that 918 patches but it's a bit of a fiddle.

Download Bill Atkinson's Eye-One Pro Targets from here:

   http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html

Pick one (I use the 1728 target), rename the reference file to "i1 Easy RGB 1.2.txt" and replace the file with the same name in the Eye-One Reference Files->Printer folder. Rename and save the original if you want. You can then read and generate profiles with Match based on the larger target. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=90366\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I tried your suggestion, but it didn't work for me.  I have version 3.6.1 and it seems to be limited in the following ways:  It refuses to consider more than 2 strips, and it refuses to look at more than 34 rows.  So when I try to measure a set of charts for 1728 patches, I1 Match will only consider the first 34 rows whereas the Bill Atkinson charts have 48 rows.

Any suggestions?  Thanks.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2007, 07:54:26 PM by CLasser » Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2101


« Reply #31 on: February 03, 2007, 08:48:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I tried your suggestion, but it didn't work for me.  I have version 3.6.1 and it seems to be limited in the following ways:  It refuses to consider more than 2 strips, and it refuses to look at more than 34 rows.  So when I try to measure a set of charts for 1728 patches, I1 Match will only consider the first 34 rows whereas the Bill Atkinson charts have 48 rows.

Any suggestions?  Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99089\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not sure that you can use Match to read the larger targets, but you can use Match to generate profiles based on the measurements that you already have using the larger targets. Let me clarify. You should use MeasureTool (part of ProfileMaker) to perform the measurements using the big target. ProfileMaker will let you read targets without a dongle. Save the measurement results to a text file.

Then do the trick you did above with replacing one of the target files for Match with the big target.

Then when you open up Match, instead of performing measurements there, you read in the measurements you made in MeasureTool by loading the saved text file. Then you hit the Next button and Match goes ahead and builds the profile.

This works on Match 3.6.1 on Windows for me.

Eric
Logged

vjbelle
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2007, 05:04:44 PM »
ReplyReply

For what its worth I also have used i1 photo and migrated to Profile Maker Photo.  The main reason was that no matter how many patches are/could be read there probably would have to be some profile editing.  i1 doesn't allow the kind of fine tuning that Profile Maker does.  Also, the need to understand what colors to adjust is critical for a successful final profile.  

I have a Canon iPF8000 and it had a 'hot' yellow/green cast from the profile generated from i1. I could get it out with the editor but at a cost.  The editor went too far in the opposite direction making certain tones neutral when they should have had some color.  

Profile Maker got me much closer with the profile it generated but there was still this slightly hot yellow/green cast that I wanted to get rid of.  The profile editing module is much more precise than i1 and it also has a preview that 'really' allows you to see what's going on when a curve or adjustment is applied.  The resulting profile is the most accurate I've ever used and what is seen on my monitor is 'really' what comes out of my printer.  The colors and black and white levels are very accurate - more accurate than anything I have used in the past and this includes anything from Imageprint.  What is even more interesting is that the Black and White images (when using my profile) are dead on.  I've never seen anything this neutral for black and white coming out of an ink jet printer - much more accurate than using the Canon plug in and converting to black and white.  

I am not a master of this program but so far it has been worth every penny I have spent on it.  

Victor
Logged
CLasser
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2007, 09:59:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm not sure that you can use Match to read the larger targets, but you can use Match to generate profiles based on the measurements that you already have using the larger targets. Let me clarify. You should use MeasureTool (part of ProfileMaker) to perform the measurements using the big target. ProfileMaker will let you read targets without a dongle. Save the measurement results to a text file.

Then do the trick you did above with replacing one of the target files for Match with the big target.

Then when you open up Match, instead of performing measurements there, you read in the measurements you made in MeasureTool by loading the saved text file. Then you hit the Next button and Match goes ahead and builds the profile.

This works on Match 3.6.1 on Windows for me.

Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99093\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That did the trick.  Thank you.

As for the results, other than taking more time, it's not clear to me that I get better results than with the regular 918 patches.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2808



WWW
« Reply #34 on: May 25, 2007, 03:12:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...  My understanding is that the "Pro" model printers are linearized at the factory. ...[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89990\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually I think the only difference in the 2 is the Express Digital software that is included with the pro version.  Doubtful they would actually run the printers through different processes - and I can't imagine them selling a printer that wasn't calibrated.
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad