Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Now for the Bonus round question ! i1xtreme UV or NON UV system & why ?  (Read 8946 times)
Studio2bn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« on: March 04, 2010, 10:13:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for all the help....I am going with the i1xtreme....But......do I go with the UV filtered model or the NON UV Filtered model Huh I have researched and researched and can't seem to find any true benefits for picking one over the other...

Please share any info you have and "Why" one would be of more of a benefit than the other....


Thanks again for your time and help,

J Michael

Studio2bn@cox.net
Logged
probep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2010, 10:25:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Studio2bn
Thanks for all the help....I am going with the i1xtreme....But......do I go with the UV filtered model or the NON UV Filtered model Huh I have researched and researched and can't seem to find any true benefits for picking one over the other...
Both or use papers without OBA!
Or Welcome to the great UV debate!
There are many-many articles, documents and debates about it.
For example, look at http://lists.apple.com/archives/Colorsync-...y/msg00147.html
« Last Edit: March 04, 2010, 10:30:10 AM by probep » Logged
Studio2bn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2010, 10:44:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: probep
Both or use papers without OBA!
Or Welcome to the great UV debate!
There are many-many articles, documents and debates about it.
For example, look at http://lists.apple.com/archives/Colorsync-...y/msg00147.html


Thanks for the article.....I had read another short article that stated that the NON UV system had a built in factor that compensated for the Optical Brightners anyway.....why couldn't they just put a "Removable Filter" on the system....but that would make too much sense !!!

Thanks for your time and help,

J Michael
Logged
probep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2010, 11:12:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Studio2bn
I had read another short article that stated that the NON UV system had a built in factor that compensated for the Optical Brightners anyway.....
Yes, but...
1. There are many profile builders that don't have OBA compensation option;
2. Some profile builders (X-Rite/GretagMacbeth ProfileMaker, for example) have "Correct for Optical Brightener" option, but it works ONLY for Perceptual Rendering Intent;
3. It's impossible to emulate UV-excluded spectrophotometer with UV-include spectrophotometer with some degree of certainty. For example, look at http://www.freelists.org/post/argyllcms/Us...e-FWA-content,9
4. Professional devices (iSis for example) use both modes (UV-excluded and UV-included). See http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Optical_Brig..._2_-_X-Rite_OBC
« Last Edit: March 07, 2010, 12:47:29 AM by probep » Logged
N Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 298


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2010, 11:20:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Studio2bn
Thanks for all the help....I am going with the i1xtreme....But......do I go with the UV filtered model or the NON UV Filtered model Huh I have researched and researched and can't seem to find any true benefits for picking one over the other...

Please share any info you have and "Why" one would be of more of a benefit than the other....


Thanks again for your time and help,

J Michael

Studio2bn@cox.net


I have been using Eye One spectro's for nearly 9 years. I put the same question to a senior member of the Gretag Macbeth team in Switzerland - approximately 5  years ago. They recommended sticking with the non UV type (a UV type was available), stating that the latest version of Eye One Match software automatically compensated for papers with optical brighteners.  

This advice was good enough for me as it was straight from the horse's mouth.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2010, 11:21:24 AM by Nick Walker » Logged

Studio2bn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2010, 11:39:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick Walker
I have been using Eye One spectro's for nearly 9 years. I put the same question to a senior member of the Gretag Macbeth team in Switzerland - approximately 5  years ago. They recommended sticking with the non UV type (a UV type was available), stating that the latest version of Eye One Match software automatically compensated for papers with optical brighteners.  

This advice was good enough for me as it was straight from the horse's mouth.

Nick...

That is about what I read in an article ( Brain fade) somewhere....The confusion comes in when I find blogs that were written in 2004/2005 !!! I had seen the statement that the newer models of the i1Pro/software "Do" have the ability to compensate for the OB's in papers where the older ones did not.....I was just in hopes of finding some of you guys who have been in the trenches with this product and knew the ins and outs of the best system ......

Looks like it's NON UV 2....UV  O so far.....any other feed back from other users would be very much appreciated......

Thanks....

J Michael
PS.....Now, could anyone recommend a descent inexpensive Scotch to go with the Brain Fry research !!!!!!!
« Last Edit: March 04, 2010, 01:30:36 PM by Studio2bn » Logged
probep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2010, 11:53:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Studio2bn
That is about what I read in an article ( Brain fade) somewhere....
Maybe in http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx...;SupportID=3511 ?

Nick Walker
Quote
the latest version of Eye One Match software automatically compensated for papers with optical brighteners
Ha-ha. If so and if you use Eye-one Match, what is the reason to buy i1Pro (without UV filter)?

I have an i1Pro and an i1Pro UVcut. i1Pro (without UV filter) never replace i1Pro UVcut. And vice versa. But usually I use an i1Pro (without UV filter).
« Last Edit: March 04, 2010, 12:11:43 PM by probep » Logged
englishm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2010, 11:55:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Studio2bn
PS.....Now, could anyone recommended a descent inexpensive Scotch to go with the Brain Fry research !!!!!!!

"Decent" and "Inexpensive" in the same sentence as [ single malt] Scotch is almost an oxymoron.

I'm partial to those from Islay:  Laphroaig Quarter Cask is a favourite, also  Lagavulin 16 year.  Aberlour 10 year, while not from Islay has to be among the quality vs cost winners
Logged

Studio2bn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #8 on: March 04, 2010, 01:33:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: probep
Maybe in http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx...;SupportID=3511 ?

Nick Walker

Ha-ha. If so and if you use Eye-one Match, what is the reason to buy i1Pro (without UV filter)?

I have an i1Pro and an i1Pro UVcut. i1Pro (without UV filter) never replace i1Pro UVcut. And vice versa. But usually I use an i1Pro (without UV filter).
No, all I have now is Spectraview II.....that's it....but I wanted a system that I could color balance throughout my workflow....printer, scanner, etc.....

J Michael
Logged
Studio2bn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2010, 01:36:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: englishm
"Decent" and "Inexpensive" in the same sentence as [ single malt] Scotch is almost an oxymoron.

I'm partial to those from Islay:  Laphroaig Quarter Cask is a favourite, also  Lagavulin 16 year.  Aberlour 10 year, while not from Islay has to be among the quality vs cost winners


Yea....I figured anything under $ 50.00 inexpensive....Do you happen to have any samples you could send me !!! Just a fifth of each will suffice ......at least for this week !!!
Logged
na goodman
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 350


« Reply #10 on: March 04, 2010, 06:24:11 PM »
ReplyReply

This is what I was told by xrite when I was making the same decision. If you ever think you are going to print using a rip than you should get the UV one. If you don't use a rip now and don't think you will be using one in the future than get the one without UV. i1match software will compensate automatically for OBA's in the paper. Again, if you think you will ever use a rip get the UV one.


Logged
probep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #11 on: March 05, 2010, 08:06:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: na goodman
i1match software will compensate automatically for OBA's in the paper.
I don't uderstand this statement. If "i1match software will compensate automatically for OBA's in the paper" - it's noncense. (once more again) what is the reason to buy i1Pro? If i1Pro "compensate automatically" -  i1Pro UVcut do "compensate" in reality.

i1Pro NEVER replace i1Pro UVcut.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 09:37:24 AM by probep » Logged
bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 05, 2010, 09:33:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: probep
I don't uderstand this statement. If "i1match software will compensate automatically for OBA's in the paper" - it's noncense. (once more again) what is the reason to buy i1Pro? If i1Pro "compensate automatically -  i1Pro UVcut do "compensate" in reality.

i1Pro NEVER replace i1Pro UVcut.

I'm confused--didn't you who provide the link to x-rite?  Here is what they say:

From X-Rite: "UV brighteners in paper can "fool" the spectrophotometer and result in profiles that look too yellowish.

There are two ways to compensate for UV brighteners and get a normal-looking profile. One is to attach a UV filter to the spectrophotometer. The i1, DTP41, DTP45, and Pulse spectrophotometers are available with a UV filter, but they must be ordered with this feature and cannot be changed by the user. The Spectrolino spectrophotometer has an accessory UV filter that can be changed by the user. The DTP70 and iSis both have user switchable UV options.

The second way of compensating for UV brighteners is to use a profiling program with built-in compensation. Both ProfileMaker 4 and later and i1Match 2 and above include software compensation for UV brighteners. With these programs it is not necessary to use a UV filter."


According to this, it would seem that the i1Pro could replace the i1Pro UVcut, if the profiling software you are using is able to recognize the signature of OBA papers and compensate for it.  When using the instrument with RIPs and with other software that is not able to compensate, one must use the UVcut device for proper results (option 1, above).

Seems like a good, clear answer to me--thanks for the link!

Is there another reason why you feel the i1Pro shouldn't replace the i1Pro UVcut?

-Brad
Logged

Studio2bn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2010, 10:16:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bradleygibson
I'm confused--didn't you who provide the link to x-rite?  Here is what they say:

From X-Rite: "UV brighteners in paper can "fool" the spectrophotometer and result in profiles that look too yellowish.

There are two ways to compensate for UV brighteners and get a normal-looking profile. One is to attach a UV filter to the spectrophotometer. The i1, DTP41, DTP45, and Pulse spectrophotometers are available with a UV filter, but they must be ordered with this feature and cannot be changed by the user. The Spectrolino spectrophotometer has an accessory UV filter that can be changed by the user. The DTP70 and iSis both have user switchable UV options.

The second way of compensating for UV brighteners is to use a profiling program with built-in compensation. Both ProfileMaker 4 and later and i1Match 2 and above include software compensation for UV brighteners. With these programs it is not necessary to use a UV filter."


According to this, it would seem that the i1Pro could replace the i1Pro UVcut, if the profiling software you are using is able to recognize the signature of OBA papers and compensate for it.  When using the instrument with RIPs and with other software that is not able to compensate, one must use the UVcut device for proper results (option 1, above).

Seems like a good, clear answer to me--thanks for the link!

Is there another reason why you feel the i1Pro shouldn't replace the i1Pro UVcut?


Firstly, I appreciate all the help everyone has contributed......

Probep...didn't you send me a link that stated something totally different ? I Looked back and re-read the link that was sent and now I think I am hearing the reverse of what the link stated......Do I need to get my Medications adjusted !!! I have gone back over some of the responses and see several contradications.........This is why I have been so confused about which system to buy.....I have been told that if I use a RIP that I would need to get the i1Xtreme "WITH" the UV Filter.....if I "Was Not" planning on using a RIP to go with the NON UV model ......


The only thing I have now is the Spectraview II that I bought with my NEC 2690wuxi.....which as I stated works very well, but will only calibrate my monitor....I just wanted to be able to hopefully get my printer, scanner etc in line calibrated with my monitor.......So....now we are back to which "i1xtreme" works better "Without a RIP "........I can't afford a RIP system and the i1xtreme......So, is there an answer here somewhere amongst all the confusion and contradiction !!!

Thanks
J Michael

Now, I am headed to the liquor store......I know they have an answer !!!

(Not really....I don't drink )



-Brad
Logged
bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2010, 11:23:49 PM »
ReplyReply

All this assumes of course, that you'll be using papers with optical brighteners:

Simple answer - just ask if the *software* you'll be using to make profiles can compensate for OBA's.  If it can, get the i1Pro. Otherwise, go with the i1Pro with UVCut.
Logged

shewhorn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 540


WWW
« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2010, 07:43:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I recently (about 3 weeks ago) posed the UV cut vs. non UV cut question to X-Rite, asked about why the options were there, etc... This is the story as it was told to me...  The i1 Pro is originally a Gretag MacBeth product and they chose to do UV compensation in software. When X-Rite bought them they had a different philosophy... they wanted to filter out the UV before it got to the sensor and not rely on software to do that (although I have to say I seem to remember a UV cut option being there prior to the GMB getting bought by X-Rite... (shrug)) so the UV Cut option was born. Of course the software still had to support the existing i1 Pros out there so the option still had to be present in the software.

Now... the problem is if you profile a paper with OBAs without a UV filter, the UV can potentially throw off the profile so the UV filter is a necessary thing (be it a physical filter, or a digital one). I then asked "What will happen if I profile a paper WITHOUT OBAs using a puck that has a physical filter?". In this case there is no UV content so there's nothing to filter. The end result is the same as if there was no filter there. That said I decided to go with a puck that had the UV cut and so far I haven't noticed any issues profiling non OBA paper such as Hahnemuhle German Etching. When I profile papers like Epson Exhibition Fiber the UV filter is of course already there.

Now... that filter IS of course a physical filter and any addition of an element is going to impart some kind of distortion. In this case I don't believe it's as critical as we aren't concerned about things like sharpness so the question then would be, is the physical UV cut filter detrimental to any part of the process when it is not needed? I believe the answer is no.

If there is anyone in the Boston, MA area with an i1 Pro without the UV cut filter, get in touch with me. I'd love to do a side by side comparison.

Cheers, Joe
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9167



WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2010, 08:20:36 AM »
ReplyReply

I’d agree with the fellow in Switzerland and go non UV. There are a lot of issues too with UV filtration in a unit in a general sense. Is the light source in the Spectrophotometer anything like the light source illuminating the print?

Yesterday I did some testing with an iSis (which allows both measurements, and idea situation) using Premium Luster. A UV and non UV profile produce very similar results viewed in a GTI booth. I also did some work a year ago, again with the iSis profiling a digital press that had a very high OBA content (think a b*of -6)! Again, the results were preferable with the no cut measurements in PROFILER (which has no UV compensation when building profiles).

The best solution is having an on and off switch or removable filter like my very old Spectrolino. If you have to stick with one, go non UV.
Logged

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

Posts: 2855


« Reply #17 on: March 10, 2010, 08:55:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: probep
Yes, but...
1. There are many profile builders that don't have OBA compensation option;
2. Some profile builders (X-Rite/GretagMacbeth ProfileMaker, for example) have "Correct for Optical Brightener" option, but it works ONLY for Perceptual Rendering Intent;
3. It's impossible to emulate UV-excluded spectrophotometer with UV-include spectrophotometer with some degree of certainty. For example, look at http://www.freelists.org/post/argyllcms/Us...e-FWA-content,9
4. Professional devices (iSis for example) use both modes (UV-excluded and UV-included). See http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Optical_Brig..._2_-_X-Rite_OBC

Graeme Gill of ArgyllCMS still thinks that starting from a UV included model gives the most universal approach. ArgyllCMS can compensate the UV component in the profile creation to get a UV cut based profile. That is the opposite of the method above and in my opinion the better one. His argument is that if you create a profile with a UV cut spectrometer you also have to assure that the viewing conditions later on are not lit by any UV light sources.

http://www.freelists.org/post/argyllcms/Ey...v-filter-or-not

If one uses papers with OBA (FWA) content and the spectrometer has a UV cut filter then there is already some inconsistency in the workflow. Either one selects the paper with optical brighteners to get that extra (bluish) white reflectance and profile accordingly with UV or one selects papers without OBA and then the spectrometer with a UV cut filter doesn't do a better job than the one without a UV cut filter. An analogy is in selecting OBA containing papers and frame them behind normal glass, the glass cuts out most of the UV light that should create the OBA effect.

As I understand there are also two methods of UV filter cut. A UV cut filter on the lamp and a UV cut filter on the sensor. There's a difference as the second one should still measure the OBA effect to a degree but isn't influenced by reflecting UV light. I could be wrong on this but I have a vague memory of a discussion on the Colorsync list. Led lamps in Spectrometers and colorimeters will usually fall in the first category as the selected lightsource(s) doesn't have a UV component.

On the HP Z models that I have the spectrometers have a UV cut filter. For me another good reason to get an Eye 1 Basic without the filter.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/







Logged
probep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #18 on: March 10, 2010, 09:02:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Some specialists prefer a spectrophotometer without UV filter, some - with UV filter (Eric Chan, for example   ).
Spectrolinos are not produced now.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2010, 09:11:56 AM by probep » Logged
probep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #19 on: March 10, 2010, 09:11:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ernst Dinkla
Graeme Gill of ArgyllCMS still thinks that starting from a UV included model gives the most universal approach. ArgyllCMS can compensate the UV component in the profile creation to get a UV cut based profile. That is the opposite of the method above and in my opinion the better one. His argument is that if you create a profile with a UV cut spectrometer you also have to assure that the viewing conditions later on are not lit by any UV light sources.
Sorry, did you read http://www.freelists.org/post/argyllcms/Us...e-FWA-content,9 ?
I do confirm that it's imposible to emulate i1Pro UVcut thoroughly.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2010, 10:26:34 AM by probep » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad