Digital BW, The Print

You can "rent" it by going to a profiling service of which there are many.
That's fully within the license conditions.

As for wanting to "learn how to make [your] own profiles" it's not that
hard: print the target and then drag the device over it when the package
says so.  That's about it.  Doubt you'd learn much more than that.  Good
dealers will offer demonstrations and be cognizant of other competing
devices.  Again there's not much difference in the use of the device or in
fact the device hardware itself.  The differences are in the software: the
gamut mapping algorithms.  You and I are highly unlikely to learn the
intricacies of that science in our lifetimes.  But again a profiling service
(or services) or dealer can provide you with profiles from a range of
packages for the same data so that you can determine which gamut mapping
algorithms you think you'd prefer.

There's good competition in the profiling package market.  The reason they
aren't free isn't due to collusion or scarcity of supply.  It costs a lot in
development to build and maintain the algorithms/software to make a good
profile - even from a given set of already measured data.  But they're not
that expensive either.  You can achieve a lot with an EyeOne Photo which
costs a $1200 or so (there are likely cheaper alternatives).  Versus the
cost of a good computer, display, scanner, camera, lenses, Photoshop, paper
and ink that's not a massive sum of money.  If you'd rather avoid the
capital cost then profiling services fill the gap.  You are just looking to
arbitrage the cost purchase vs outsourced profiling, by renting.  GM would
charge a healthy premium for something not bound by a single user license.
How much do you think Adobe would charge for a copy of Photoshop that could
be used by anyone, anytime, anywhere, on any number of machines?


> From: Dennis Dowling <den@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri,  9 Dec 2005 05:29:04 -0800
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Sharing EyeOne Profiles - Renting
> 
> 12/9/05 10:02 AM: stevekale@... (Steve Kale) apparently typed...
>> I must say I find the licence perfectly sensible.  Else we could simply rent
>> one out to anyone who wants it.  Then there wouldn't be anything to rent
>> because nobody would invest the capital to develop it.  Then you'd really be
>> sucking wind.  These guys sell a complex instrument and very complex
>> software serving a very good purpose.  They deserve to earn a fair return as
>> a result.  
> 
> Funny, I was just about to ask if there are any photo equipment shops that
> rent out spectrometers/profilers for print calibration.  I can see that the
> software license probably limits installation on various machines.
> 
> It's a debatable issue of whether a company will loose sales on a product if
> it's rented. It depends on the cost of the product and how often a person
> would use it. An expensive product that gets used daily is justifiable. But,
> something like a spectrometer/profiler that gets used rarely by an average
> user isn't a justifiable expense. There's always a trade-off between the
> number of rental shops buying products verses average users not buying them.
> Every other piece of photo equipment is available for rent why not profilers?
> 
> I know there are profiling services that can do it for you. But, one of the
> reasons I'd want to  rent a spectrometer is so I could learn how to make my
> own profiles. Another reason to rent is to be able to test out various
> products before buying one.
> 
> Like most people I remember being disappointed with prints the first time I
> started using an inkjet printer. Later you're relieved and excited when you
> discover there is technology available to get good results by using icc
> calibration/profiling methods. But, then there is the second round of
> disappointment when you realize the expense of a good profiling system. I'm
> sure there a many people who are ready and willing to experiment and learn
> more about profiling but are being held back by expensive equipment.
> 
> I agree the developers deserve compensation for products. Hopefully, as with
> other technology, profiling products will become more commonplace and
> eventually less expensive.
> 
> - Den.