Digital BW, The Print

This thread suggests CM is very useful for B&W & linearization/icc 
creation via QTR:

<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/messa
ge/91672>


Mike.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" 
<dfaprinting@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@ 
> wrote:
> > Take a careful look at both the display calibration features and 
> the printer profiling features of the CMunki before committing to 
it. 
> And compare that feature set to what you'd get in Spyder3Studio... 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> From the Xrite website:
> "New RGB and CMYK printer profiling technology delivers a high 
> quality printer profile. Simply scan one test chart of only 50 
> patches and ColorMunki calculates an interim profile having learned 
> how your printer behaves with these colors. It then produces a 
second 
> chart of 50 patches that perfects your profile once you scan it. 
> ColorMunki is so smart it even has the ability to optimize your 
> profile based on images for specific colors, black & white, and 
flesh 
> tones for example"
> 
> Oh great, another "What were they thinking" moment! This reflects 
> back to when I tried that STUPID eye1 Design package that GMB sold. 
> Unless the so simple a simian could operate Munki can run in a more 
> expanded patch mode, run from it! As fast as you can! Yes I'm sure 
> the software has matured such that it will make a profile that 
isn't 
> totally ugly, but with only 50 patches it is still rough at best, 
and 
> only decent on printers that are really linear. WHat it is trying 
to 
> do is get a rough linearization curve with the first 50 patches, 
then 
> make the profile off the second target. I'm sure this approach 
works 
> better than the Design (sl)easyRGB did, but your money would be 
> better spent on a higher functioning unit.
> 
> If you display is in question, then you should probably buy a 
better 
> display and start there.
> 
> I think I'm going to send Xrite an email about the munki after I 
> research it a little more. I wrote back and forth about the Design 
2 
> (or so) years ago, I guess they didn't listen. When I talked to GMB 
> about the Design they pretty much told me it was just to sell the 
> spectro for people to use with other software, which is the only 
way 
> it worked properly. Again, I'm sure the linearization step goes a 
> long way to fixing the problems with the small patch count targets, 
> but I doubt it is worth the cash.
>