Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: i1Pro2 "Raven" review  (Read 19547 times)
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1573


WWW
« Reply #80 on: April 21, 2012, 12:17:55 PM »
ReplyReply

That's just how the patch generator works in i1P. To get a feel for how it works just start tapping the right arrow button next to the number of patches in i1P's Patch Set generator. Clicking this right arrow will increase the number of patches by 1. Watch the number of gray patches increase until it gets to a certain point where a much larger number of color patches are generated displacing those gray patches, and it starts all over again. Try it - you'll get a feel for how it works pretty fast. I'm a gray balance freak and so I like to go for those certain patch counts where the gray patches are maximized. Quite a number of years ago I spoke with the guy that first engineered this and he liked to do the same thing too.
This is one of the advantages of ArgyllCMS in that you can specify the number of gray patches irrespective of the number total patches you specify.  Admittedly it's not as user friendly in that you need to run it under a command line and it doesn't support the iPro2 yet.
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8073



WWW
« Reply #81 on: April 21, 2012, 03:24:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Watch the number of gray patches increase until it gets to a certain point where a much larger number of color patches are generated displacing those gray patches, and it starts all over again.

It sure would be nice if we could just define a patch set, then, like the Optimization target generator, open a cfx file (like Marc’s) and have it added. For whatever reason, when I try to open Marc’s file, i1P pops an error. And if it worked, I suspect it would replace, not add those patches to the original set.
Logged

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

Posts: 56


« Reply #82 on: April 21, 2012, 03:47:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Scott,

Thanks for the response.

Quote
To get a feel for how it works just start tapping the right arrow button next to the number of patches in i1P's Patch Set generator. Clicking this right arrow will increase the number of patches by 1. Watch the number of gray patches increase until it gets to a certain point where a much larger number of color patches are generated displacing those gray patches, and it starts all over again.

-- No disrespect intended, but Gee Whiz, come on!
I have been doing exactly that (related to my comment about using the patch generator in +1 increments) - yes, visually you get a clue about which patches are close to gray, but the only way to confirm with numeric feedback is to actually generate target tiffs. Doesn't this seem a bit tedious when a user wants to compare steps in +1 increments from, say 2989 patches to 4052 (imagine generating over 1000 tiff files to examine)?

OK, that's a pretty extreme example. To come back to your statement I quote above (thanks again!) - why does Xrite not even hint about this valuable information? Seems like performance along/near the gray axis is pretty important to anybody who purchases i1Profiler Publish - why is such a strong feature of the product kept secret? (Rhossydd was almost too kind in describing the history of documentation from G/M, now X-rite)

All right, I'll stop complaining. Instead, here's another question: In your capacity as provider of support and documentation for i1P -  Wink - can you post a little tutorial listing & explaining good starting points for CMYK profile settings for say, 1) a RIP driving an Epson 7880 inkjet; 2) process printing - say, offset; and 3) digital/hybrid printing (e.g., Indigo)? Intelligent black? K start, Max K (OK, I sort of know those, at least for #1 & #2), K curve & width? Smoothness? Chromatic adaptation? ...

In your spare time, of course!   Cheesy

Seriously, I do appreciate the info you've shared here. And if this kind of information is already available somewhere and I'v missed it - sorry! - please advise.

Regards,

John
JWL Images
Emeryville, CA
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8073



WWW
« Reply #83 on: April 21, 2012, 03:59:59 PM »
ReplyReply

-- No disrespect intended, but Gee Whiz, come on!

I don’t disagree with you and it is good that we vent so that hopefully the folks inside X-rite will listen.

The chart generation in i1P is pretty goofy. Why on earth they would think to separate a patch set from the target is beyond me. I keep having to futz around with number of pages (of a fixed size) and patches, it drives me crazy. Why can’t I tell the software I’m using 13x19 paper for an iSis and just build as many patches of X size that will fit on one page? Or two? Why can’t I load a large group of neutral patches like Marc’s and then have it fill in the rest? This back and forth between Patch Set and Test Chart is a big step backwards in terms of defining a target compared to MeasureTool. I should have control over WHERE on the page I want my patches too. Or that I want some patches repeated over the page (so for creating a target for a press, I can sample paper white over the page, or a group of neutrals).

If X-rite could take ColorPort and MeasureTool, plus the patch generation in both the Profile and Optimization workflows, add some tweaks (like repeating patches on the page), we’d have a really professional tool to build targets. We don’t have that yet.
Logged

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

Posts: 1283


WWW
« Reply #84 on: April 22, 2012, 09:57:27 AM »
ReplyReply

This is one of the advantages of ArgyllCMS....  Admittedly it's not as user friendly in that you need to run it under a command line and it doesn't support the iPro2 yet.

And unfortunately the profiles are't as good as i1P's, especially in the Perceptual intent.

Quote
It sure would be nice if we could just define a patch set, then, like the Optimization target generator, open a cfx file (like Marc’s) and have it added.

Wouldn't it be nice to see a "Gray Axis" slider in the Patch generator that controlled the percentage of gray patches relative to color patches?

Quote
why does Xrite not even hint about this valuable information? Seems like performance along/near the gray axis is pretty important to anybody who purchases i1Profiler Publish

Can't please everyone I guess. I think they are focused on making a super smart patch generator that generates targets that deliver excellent results. If it works super well people won't have questions nor need documentation. I think it pretty cool and the results *are* fantastic. Could it be better? A little bit. Be we have to realize that our dialog here is super rare and nitpicky. We're in the 1% that they can only spend so much time making us happy. The patch generator will continue to evolve and improve....

Quote
can you post a little tutorial listing & explaining good starting points for CMYK profile settings for say...

i1P breaks traditions about separation parameters and heavily adopts a "smart" analyses and adaptive parameter model. Basically it analysis your device and comes up with the parameters it feels is best. I kinda hate to say it works so damn well. People like me have spent a huge time investment developing separation parameters for PMP and MP that deliver great results on a variety of devices. - you should my collection of text files and screen grabs. I'm quite proud of the quality I've been able to deliver for my clients through this research over the past 20 years.  But all of that is nearly worthless in i1P because 97% of the time you can just ignore the separation parameters section and let it figure it our for you. I've tried to beat it on a variety of laser, inkjet, and presses and am pretty stumped. I've talked with those engineers and I think they've developed some pretty heavy duty stuff that's working under the hood. Now, there are some advanced controls that are currently lacking. I can't comment on future releases but lets not say their sitting on their hands...
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8073



WWW
« Reply #85 on: April 22, 2012, 10:44:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Now, there are some advanced controls that are currently lacking.

Would control over the black curve (custom as we had in earlier products) fall into that camp?
Logged

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

Posts: 1283


WWW
« Reply #86 on: April 22, 2012, 03:19:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Would control over the black curve (custom as we had in earlier products) fall into that camp?

That is something that's lacking.
Logged

Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1573


WWW
« Reply #87 on: April 22, 2012, 03:29:27 PM »
ReplyReply

And unfortunately the profiles are't as good as i1P's, especially in the Perceptual intent.
Scott this is in response to my comment about using ArgyllCMS; what do you use to judge the quality of the profile?  It's hard for me to do any testing at this point since I don't have the X-Rite software but may upgrade to it at some point.  I know by looking at gamut maps the Argyll profiles seem to be quite good and using the Jack Flesher test print the results are good.

Thanks,

Alan
Logged

ThDo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


« Reply #88 on: April 23, 2012, 12:01:55 AM »
ReplyReply

A 2052 only has 18 gray axis patches. I'd suggest starting with a target that contains a ton of gray axis patches. 2033 for example, contains well over 100 gray patches and will, IMO produce a better profile to start with, potentially limiting the benefit of optimization.

Thanks for this great information.

Is there a list quoting which patch size includes how many gray patches?

And am I right, that your optimised patch set can only be used if also using your service.

Logged
Jalok
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39


« Reply #89 on: April 23, 2012, 05:58:17 AM »
ReplyReply

With i1P it does...

Great - let us know what you find!

OnSight, you're Right! In many aspects the 2033-patch targets produced the best profile among all the target sets: 2052, 2052 plus 513 optimization (with b/w image opt), and 2033 patches. GamutView indicates 2033-patch profile has a bit more out-of-gamut tones then the other ones, also raising the L* bar one point. In an increasing gamut size order, I had: 2033 < 2052_opt < 2052. But the transitions between out- and in-gamut tones became slightly better, comparable to the 2052_opt profile. The grayscale smoothness and neutrality were the most noticeable improvements. The neutrality of 2033-patch profile was similar to the 2052_opt one and both considerably better than the original 2052-patch profile. About the GS smoothness, the 2033 was the best of all, somewhat better than the 2052_opt in <100 (0-255) tones, and hugely better than the original 2052-patch profile.

I wish I had known this before. I would have constructed better profiles from the very first attempt, without having to invoke second stage optimization procedures. I didn't investigate an optimization over the 2033-patch profile, though. I'm not sure if there would be room for noticeable or significant improvements, at least with the ink/paper combination I used to perform there experiments.
Logged
Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1283


WWW
« Reply #90 on: April 24, 2012, 09:38:27 PM »
ReplyReply

OnSight, you're Right! In many aspects the 2033-patch targets produced the best profile among all the target sets...

Thanks for following up with this. Your finding is in line with my own. Start with a target with lots of grays and a silly second step optimization isn't needed. Cheers to the simplicity of that.
Logged

JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #91 on: April 27, 2012, 02:05:37 PM »
ReplyReply

So is it the consensus that 2033 patch count is the way to go? Or is there some larger patch count that also has lots of grays and would be even better?

I just got my i1Pro2/Profiler upgrade (previously had i1Photo Rev-A with i1Match), so I'm going to be re-profiling my papers in the next week or so...
Logged

Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1283


WWW
« Reply #92 on: April 28, 2012, 08:50:27 AM »
ReplyReply

So is it the consensus that 2033 patch count is the way to go? Or is there some larger patch count that also has lots of grays and would be even better?

No, that's just too much work with a handheld for too little benefit. My point was that there are some patch count intervals that maximize the number of grays. i1Profiler does a much better job than pervious engines with fewer, optimized patches. The old "more patches is better" adage don't apply anymore (at least not in the same way). In fact, more patches can even increase the change of measurement error. Try 815 for example. It's far less work and represents the sweet spot, IMO. Or do some testing and come up with your own conclusions! That's just my $0.02. Maybe Jalok will do a 815 vs 2033 patch comparison next :-p
Logged

ThDo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


« Reply #93 on: April 29, 2012, 04:28:51 AM »
ReplyReply

After readng you comments I have played a little with the patch sizes.

I like 1005 - it just fills two A4 pages and has a lot of gray values.

Thanks for your information - I have never really looked at the data distribution of the patches.

Logged
SergeyT
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #94 on: May 01, 2012, 12:24:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I was following this discussion with a lot of interest. Some good discoveries about the patch generation alg.
I did not want to spend to much time and resources on making a 6000 target(which does not include max number of grays anyway  Wink.
What I did I have combined the color patches from a 906 patches target and all the grays and "off-grays" (329 total) from a 5837 target (which to my naked eye has the max number of grays out of any other Patch Generator created files. As a result I came up with a custom 1229 patch set. I have created a profile based upon it and I can tell from both soft proof and prints (perceptual only for now) that it is much more accurate than anything my z3200 could ever produce. The gamut almost perfectly matches the ones produced by the Z but the color accuracy and smoothness are way above.
The 1229 patch set is attached for anyone to try it out.
I could probably append those 329 gray patches to the board's favorite 2033 patch set...
Also if someone could send me a copy of a measurement file with dual (UV and UV-cut) measurements in it, I would think of how to combine 2 measurement files, one created with a UV and the other with UV-cut i1Pro, into one and make it work for OBA compensation.
 
Logged
Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1308



WWW
« Reply #95 on: May 12, 2012, 11:58:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Lately, I visited drupa, where I had a pleasure to chat with a well-respected color geek. The good news for current/future i1pro2 owners is that he tested a couple of units, and found out that inter-instrumental agreement seem to be twice as better as the former i1pros. New wavelength calibration feature seems to work as expected!
« Last Edit: May 12, 2012, 12:06:32 PM by Czornyj » Logged

Marcin Kałuża
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3644



WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 13, 2012, 02:03:19 PM »
ReplyReply

I have put up some of my own initial impressions on my color blog

http://photofeedback.blogspot.fr/2012/05/i1pro2-xrites-new-heavy-metal-release.html

You can see what is in the case.

A lot of the ergonomic issues with the i1 have been addressed, the display shoe is much improved, you can now profile your laptop without turning it on its side, etc. Enjoy the pictures. I will add more info as I work with the device.

Edmund
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 08:40:04 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
ThDo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


« Reply #97 on: June 09, 2012, 11:31:13 AM »
ReplyReply

What I did I have combined the color patches from a 906 patches target and all the grays and "off-grays" (329 total) from a 5837 target (which to my naked eye has the max number of grays out of any other Patch Generator created files. As a result I came up with a custom 1229 patch set.

Thanks for sharing your patch fset.
I have looked at the file - how exactly did you find the grays and "off-grays"? I am a little bit lost at finding them (I want to experiment a little bit with patch sets)

Also if someone could send me a copy of a measurement file with dual (UV and UV-cut) measurements in it, I would think of how to combine 2 measurement files, one created with a UV and the other with UV-cut i1Pro, into one and make it work for OBA compensation.

Would this also work with the i1 Pro 2?
What exactly would you need?

Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad