Digital BW, The Print

Antonis,

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Antonis Ricos" 
<antonisphoto@y...> wrote:
> Martin,
> 
> here are some replies. I don't think I know everything there is to 
know and the 
> waters are pretty murky. But there goes:
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Martin Wesley" 
> <mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> 
> ...
> Is this they type of situation that as you pay more and 
> > more you are gaining smaller and smaller improvements in quality? 
In 
> > other words would I see a huge improvement using Profiler Pro and 
a 
> > Colormouse but a much smaller improvement in moving from that 
setup 
> > to a XTP-41 and one of the high-end software packages?
> 
> I don't know that answer for sure - and I doubt anyone does without 
having 
> both instruments. Remember that we are distinguishing between 
accuracy 
> and convenience. A strip reading device is more expensive because 
of 
> convenience features, but not necessarily more accurate than a 
> single-reading meter.
> 
Understood. I gather then that as you move up the cost ladder on 
these you are looking at instruments designed for very high volume 
work in large printing and graphics opperations.

> 
> > 
> > Since I might only be doing say 20 profiles until I found my 
> > ink/paper combinations and then 2 or 3 occasionally when a new 
paper 
> > came out, it seems that the tedious patch at a time measuring 
still 
> > might be acceptable.
> 
> ....
> 
> You may want to price what this would cost you to do by sending out 
to a good 
> source willing to make you custom profiles.

This is a good idea if there is someone out there doing quad profiles 
and the price is right. Looking at some places that provide canned 
and custom color profiles the cost for the custom profiles is in the 
$100 to $200 range. So if my estimate of 20 profiles initially is 
correct I am at a break even point. Of course I don't have to do all 
the work but then I don't have control over the process.

> 
> > 
> > A couple of half way measures suggest themselves and perhaps you 
can 
> > tell me if they are worth the cost. One would be to buy the 
> > Swatchbook at $1400 and use it as a highly accurate densitometer 
to 
> > measure step tables to move accurately create correction curves 
in 
> > Photoshop. The second is to spend the $900 to just get the 
Profiler 
> > Pro and rely on my Linoscan 1400 to get no so accurate data off 
the 
> > targets. Would one approach be inherently better than the other?
> 
> Scanner-based profiling is something I haven't done. From comments 
here 
> and from just theory in my head, it's a no-brainer to buy the 
Swatchbook or 
> equivalent single-read spectrophotometer (that would double as a 
> densitometer and dot gain calculator).  In this case the $500 would 
represent 
> a huge step (as opposed to other "steps" you outlined for higher 
end 
> products).

I was afraid that that was true. As an all round tool the 
spectrophotometer would be the think to have. Too bad you can't enter 
the data from the spectrophotometer into one of the low end scanner 
based packages like Profiler RGB which is only $200.

I need to do some soul (and wallet) searching. Having a near perfect 
screen to final print match for all the papers and inks I want to use 
sure would be nice and cut out a lot of the trial and error printing 
I am doing now.

Thanks for all the advice. 

Martin
> 
> 
> > 
> > P.S. If you want to get rid of any of those X-rites, let me know. 
<g>
> 
> The only one I no longer need is a portable reflection 
densitometer  X-Rite 
> 404. As new condition, 12 years old, in its case with power supply. 
Useful for 
> measuring across large prints and not dragging a wire behind you 
(it's 
> rechargable). Price to be determined.
> For an alternative source I would look on eBay. Last time there, I 
bought an 
> 810TR (refl/trans) for $750. Costs new $3500!!


> 
> 
> Antonis