Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Designjet 130 and Printfix Pro  (Read 23034 times)
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2007, 03:42:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It would be very useful (I think) to actually compare the readings for each patch and compute the differences.  Supposedly the big "weakness" of printfix pro is the limited hardware...but how limited is it really?  This would tell us.  The rest would then be software (which can always be improved).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=106898\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The i1 Pro tungsten light source has a faily large latency if you like. As the lamp heats up it influences readings. If you take a chart and read it cold, read it again after you've had your hand on it for a long time, you'll have delta e differences of over 0.5 usually only the L values show significant differences. I noticed this before but always thought it was the light scratching of the surface before the new ruler came out.
Graeme Gil brought it to the attention of the Apple Colorsync user forum that he was seeing these shift due to the light source.
Not much information is around on the LED side of operating condition expectancies variation.
From what reading I've done there are LED that for the reading of the charts that don't emit light in 380-410 nm yet certain spectros have LED's that do justly to make the inter-instrument agreement inline with past instruments.
So it is possible to have a non uv source have LED's for rebuilding the spectrum to make redundancy between instruments. It gets a bit confusing to know what the new LED's will do and what they won't, and or if you need to know.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4036



« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2007, 08:46:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Not much information is around on the LED side of operating condition expectancies variation.
From what reading I've done there are LED that for the reading of the charts that don't emit light in 380-410 nm yet certain spectros have LED's that do justly to make the inter-instrument agreement inline with past instruments.
So it is possible to have a non uv source have LED's for rebuilding the spectrum to make redundancy between instruments. It gets a bit confusing to know what the new LED's will do and what they won't, and or if you need to know.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107154\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yeah, iSis has the ability to make With-UV or UV-Cut measurements while using LED illuminants with an i1 spectro head.

I would speculate the same technology could find its way into an EyeOne Pro  revision in the future.

Edmund
« Last Edit: March 17, 2007, 10:54:08 AM by eronald » Logged
djgarcia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 343



WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 20, 2007, 08:27:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Where any of these tests done with the new PrintFIX PRO 2.0 software? Or do you not think it will make any difference? Looks like a nice upgrade.
Logged

Over-Equipped Snapshooter - EOS 1dsII & 1DsIII, Zeiss & Leica lenses
http://improbablystructuredlayers.net
GerardK
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2007, 02:47:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Where any of these tests done with the new PrintFIX PRO 2.0 software? Or do you not think it will make any difference? Looks like a nice upgrade.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The testing for both articles was done with version 1.1.1 of the PrintFIX Pro software. The testing for Part II was done in November 2006, before version 2 was released, but due to many delays, unforeseen circumstances, mishaps and malfortunes, the article wasn't published until last week.

I downloaded 2.0 and built a new profile but haven't made any comparisons yet.


Gerard Kingma
[a href=\"http://www.kingma.nu]www.kingma.nu[/url]
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2847


« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2007, 09:11:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The testing for both articles was done with version 1.1.1 of the PrintFIX Pro software. The testing for Part II was done in November 2006, before version 2 was released, but due to many delays, unforeseen circumstances, mishaps and malfortunes, the article wasn't published until last week.

I downloaded 2.0 and built a new profile but haven't made any comparisons yet.
Gerard Kingma
www.kingma.nu
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Part II is quite a read but worth it. Thank you and the contributors for the work done. That Graeme Gill of Argyll knows what has to be done in CM was clear from the moment I saw his first Colorsync list contributions.

One thing seems to be missing in this overview, a Spectrometer that measures into UV as well. The 3 hardware tools mentioned are all UV filtered one way or another. The HP Premium Plus Photo Satin may not be loaded with OBAs, it does have optical brighteners. HP's canned profile doesn't look like one that is based on unfiltered readings either. This can be expected in HPs conservative approach as sketched in the review. BTW, I have seen another approach in the first Epson 9000 (dye ink) canned profiles 8 years ago, in that case they made sure that any Epson 9000 delivered would fit within the gamut of that inflated profile. No customer complained about the printed gamut size but they all got something different from their printers :-) At that time you needed a custom profile for precisely the opposite: get actual color control.

I wonder what a normal (non UV filtered) SpectroCam (Xenon flash light source) + ACMS would deliver. In view of Xrite/GM dominance on the market another software competitor + a second hardware source is more than welcome. PFP II isn't filling that gap alone in my opinion.

Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9106



WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2007, 09:16:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree that it would be useful to test how each product handles FWA's although they should be avoided like the plague.
Logged

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

Posts: 9106



WWW
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2007, 09:18:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Speaking of OB's, this went up on the ColorSync list yesterday and it's worth its weight in gold (many thanks to Robin)

Quote
For those interested in the OBA/FWA (Optical Brightening Agent/Fluorescent Whitening Agent) issue, I have just finished putting together a page on the issue of brightened papers (www.rmimaging.com/information/fine_art_paper.html). The paper includes data from paper samples obtained at the PMA show. Unfortunately I did not get the Innova paper mentioned by Andrew Rodney, but I did get papers from Moab, Hahnemuehle, Epson, BF Inkjet and Crane. I measured all of these papers with a Spectrolino with and without a UV blocking filter, so I could detect even small amounts of brightener. The page does not have the spectra, but it does discuss the issue of brighteners for fine art print papers and it has a chart showing which papers have brighteners and which do not.

If anyone would like to have a particular paper added to the list, let me know. If anyone needs actual spectral data, also let me know.

Robin Myers
robin@rmimaging.com
Logged

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

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2007, 09:34:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree that it would be useful to test how each product handles FWA's although they should be avoided like the plague.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107860\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are not many papers without OBA's. The resellers believe we want them. With education finally users will have to turn this around.
As much as I lov the Innova Ultra, they told me it was free of OBA. Curious, as the white is very bright, I put it under blacklight. It is loaded.
A little will not show significant change over displayed years, but a lot will.
I'd prefer to see a lot less use of OBA.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9106



WWW
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2007, 09:39:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
There are not many papers without OBA's. The resellers believe we want them. With education finally users will have to turn this around.
As much as I lov the Innova Ultra, they told me it was free of OBA. Curious, as the white is very bright, I put it under blacklight. It is loaded.
A little will not show significant change over displayed years, but a lot will.
I'd prefer to see a lot less use of OBA.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107863\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Less is better for sure. There's a bit in Premium Luster. When I ran a black light over the Canon paper I was sent with my iPF 5000 (premium photo satin) I was almost blinded. Put it next to Luster and luster looks yellow. But I really hate the Canon paper anyway. Under a GTI booth, it looks awful (for obvious reasons). Way, way too 'white'.
Logged

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

Posts: 11


« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2007, 12:57:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
To do printer profiles right, a spectrophotometer-based solution is by far the best. Scanner-based solutions like PrintFix really don't work well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=98529\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Except that PrintFIX PRO -isn't- a scanner based solution. It's a spectrocolorimeter. And according to Gerard's latest article, it holds its own very well against the other solutions which use a spectrophotometer instead.

What you're seeing here is that both spectrocolorimeters (the PFP spectro) and spectrophotometers (the other, more expensive instruments) all provide the same kind of raw material. The more expensive devices do it more quickly, and, if someone needs spectral data for some particular reason, that's the way to go. But for inkjet profiling, the differences come down to the software, not the hardware.

David Miller
Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions
ColorVision
Logged
dmiller
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #30 on: March 23, 2007, 12:59:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Printfix Pro's measuring device is still RGB-based; not a spectrophotometer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=98553\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No, you're wrong again. It's not RGB based. It's a spectrocolorimeter that supplies Lab values to the PrintFIX PRO software.


David Miller
Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions
ColorVision
Logged
dmiller
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #31 on: March 23, 2007, 01:06:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Datacolor 1005 colorimeter is limited in that it can not measure spectral information, so improvements in the software are limited to what PFP can do with the measurements.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107016\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The usefulness of spectral measurements is being able to change the illuminant and to recalculate Lab values from the same base set of spectral data. That's a high end feature that wouldn't be used by people who are looking to spend $500 or so for a printer profiling package.

Improvements in the PFP software aren't limited by the measurement values. The most important new feature in the 2.0 version was the use of the extended grays target to provide very accurate neutrals and near-neutrals using the same profile that would be used for doing color prints, and this improvement wasn't limited by the fact that the PFP spectro doesn't provide spectral values...:-)

David Miller
Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions
ColorVision
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2847


« Reply #32 on: March 23, 2007, 06:10:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What you're seeing here is that both spectrocolorimeters (the PFP spectro) and spectrophotometers (the other, more expensive instruments) all provide the same kind of raw material. The more expensive devices do it more quickly, and, if someone needs spectral data for some particular reason, that's the way to go. But for inkjet profiling, the differences come down to the software, not the hardware.

David Miller
Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions
ColorVision
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Which is the thing I am interested in. Do the 6 color LEDs illuminate the N-color printer patches build with 6 hues CMYRGB as good as a continuous spectral light source does ?  There's a difference in the secondary mixes (RGB) of a CMY inkset compared to the primary RGB patches a CMYRGB inkset makes. Not to mention the UV filtering in the lightsource that is practical outcome of the Datacolor spectrocolorimeter design. The RGB mixed patches for a given CMY inkset are quite predictably related to the CMY ink specs, the RGB hues of a CMYRGB inkset can be selected more or less independtly of the CMY hues. Copying the spectral behaviour of RGB mixes made with CMY inks isn't the thing one would expect of the N-color printer designers, the RGB inks are there to enhance the inkset. Both with small and larger targets the measurements could end in different results if the same software has to handle the different measurements and the resulting RGB profile may not fit the CMYRGB inkset in relation to that. Theory from my side as I have no PFP II profile creator.

Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9106



WWW
« Reply #33 on: March 23, 2007, 08:52:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The usefulness of spectral measurements is being able to change the illuminant and to recalculate Lab values from the same base set of spectral data. That's a high end feature that wouldn't be used by people who are looking to spend $500 or so for a printer profiling package.

Sure it would if someone had a device at that price point. Its a very useful feature and provides important options when we run into FWA's (optical brighteners). And if you're printing under anything but D50, its also useful to use that in the profile white point definition.

How can you say it wouldn't be used by these people, that's silly.

Quote
What you're seeing here is that both spectrocolorimeters (the PFP spectro) and spectrophotometers (the other, more expensive instruments) all provide the same kind of raw material.


Raw material? What the heck is that supposed to mean and be? Spectral data? First you make up a name for an instrument that has spectral in it, and then say all the instruments provide the same 'raw material'. Would you clarify exactly what you're capturing and what they are capturing as raw isn't a term anyone here should except in this context. Or are you referring to the data file a digital camera prodcues?
Logged

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

Posts: 113


« Reply #34 on: March 23, 2007, 09:01:25 AM »
ReplyReply

 

Here we go again  

Andrew, I'll leave this fight for you.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9106



WWW
« Reply #35 on: March 23, 2007, 09:11:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote


Here we go again  

Andrew, I'll leave this fight for you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108252\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Please, don't. Between the two color management vendors on this site who post questionable marketing speak, I can't call Karl Lang that often <g>.

I'm going off to Home Depot for a few more measuring tapes and some high rubber boots.
Logged

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

Posts: 113


« Reply #36 on: March 23, 2007, 09:30:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Please, don't. Between the two color management vendors on this site who post questionable marketing speak, I can't call Karl Lang that often <g>.

I'm going off to Home Depot for a few more measuring tapes and some high rubber boots.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108254\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The chest waders are better. Make sure to get the ones with the good strong suspenders so that you can't be pulled out of the waders. Even if it doesn't get that high, nothing can spill over into your boots.

Having worked in floods, nothing is worse than filling your knee high boot with water. Even worse with waist high boots.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9106



WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 23, 2007, 09:41:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The chest waders are better. Make sure to get the ones with the good strong suspenders so that you can't be pulled out of the waders. Even if it doesn't get that high, nothing can spill over into your boots.

Having worked in floods, nothing is worse than filling your knee high boot with water. Even worse with waist high boots.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108256\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

A bit OT but I actually DO need to look into these for Michael’s trip to the Amazon. He said we'd need em. Never used them before and NO I'm not going in the water.

But they could do double duty here (and on DP Review where it really gets thick).
Logged

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

Posts: 555



WWW
« Reply #38 on: March 23, 2007, 10:03:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
But they could do double duty here (and on DP Review where it really gets thick).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are a braver man than I, Andrew. I left the infighting a long time ago over at DPR. It is amusing sometimes to watch from the sidelines, though.
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
dmiller
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #39 on: March 23, 2007, 10:29:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote


Here we go again  

Andrew, I'll leave this fight for you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=108252\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't know what to say about this.

I'm not here to fight with anyone. I saw a few posts, said a few simple things, and I'm not the one who's using words or making statements like:

(Andrew:)

"silly"

"questionable marketing specs"

"Raw material? What the heck is that supposed to mean and be?"

"First you make up a name for an instrument that has spectral in it"

etc etc.

Why would anyone like me (who develops color management software) want to come into a forum like this and be greeted by this kind of response?

Andrew, I worked for several years at Integrated Color Solutions as one of the primary developers on all of their basICColor software product line and also on portions of their Remote Director product, all of which (as you probably know) is based on spectral data when the measurements are taken with a sensor that supports it... including Display3 for both Integrated Color and Color Solutions, when used with an EyeOne. I think I know a little more about this than you're giving me credit for.

If anyone would like to have a reasonable discourse about any of this, then I'd be willing to continue, but with all due respect, this is a bunch of nonsense and I'm not going to get into a war of words with you over it.


David Miller
Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions
ColorVision
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad