--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> Hi Walt
>
> There is a new version of QTR Create ICC which does not have the BPC
> embedded. Which one are you using?
>
I would have thought that I was using the vesion with BPC
incorporated, because checking BPC in the Soft Proof dialogue makes
no difference in the screen view. Is there another way to identify
it? And how do I get the new one?
> The other thing to remember is that colour management is an
extremely
> finicky thing. A ton of factors come into play (including ambient
lighting,
> the accuracy of profiles and settings, the colour of other objects
in the
> filed of view etc). For example, are you looking at your prints in
a
> lighting booth with a controlled colour temperature equal to that
used to
> profile the monitor and illuminate the ink on paper when creating
the
> printer profile? Funnily enough I think things can actually be more
> difficult for B&W. I wonder what goes on with the monitor BPC and
the
> interaction between the print profile and the monitor profile.
Let's say
> your print black point is L*=10 and so is your monitor black
point. If your
> are looking at your file (without a soft proof) then the deepest
black you
> can see is L*=10. One would think that you already have your soft
proof
> (ignoring the other factors - gamma and white point - for now)
because the
> monitor black is as weak as the print, ie that a soft proof would
not change
> the look of the image on screen at all. But I wonder if when you
ask PS to
> soft proof the print it has to show you a simulation of the weaker
than
> perfect black (according to the selected colour settings). And
hence the
> black point gets ratcheted above L*=10 in the simulation. It
shouldn't and
> probably doesn't but at times I do wonder because I too find that
the
> displayed black point in a soft proof for anything printing to
matte paper
> seems overly light. BUT I also recognise that I am not looking at
my prints
> in a lighting booth and most likely my work area lighting is a lot
duller
> than the D50 standard.
I don't use a booth for viewing, but I use a D50 light (measures at
5100K) at between 350 and 500 LUX (measured and adjustable) in an
otherwise darkened room. I also "walk" any print around the house.
I have been able to get very good correspondence print to screen with
other color management systems. In using the Create ICC profile, I
have calibrated the monitor to 5000K and 2.2 with both a Spyder 2 and
the i1 Match. I prefer the latter because it actually uses the
hardware for black point (Spyder2 just gives generic settings for
black and white point). Yes, this is an LCD monitor, but it has
performed capably in a variety of other workflows, including color.
I am using a 2.2 workspace (or assigned profile).
The problem I am seeing is more one of a gamma shift than a black
point shift. But it is nothing subtle at all--the screen view is
unusable for predicting the print. I am guessing, but I'd say the
print gamma is shifted down 10-15 points (darker) compared to the
screen. The print blacks are also more compressed, not just darker
than the screen but with less separation and detail than visible on
the screen. What I am after on the screen is not a point-for-point
correspondence to the print, but a more-or-less "good impression" of
the print, especially of gamma and contrast. I can fairly easily get
this by just doing a PS curve matching the screen to print by eye,
but then I cannot use the PS color management.
>
> At any rate, I tend to no longer soft proof that much when doing
B&W. (I
> only take a quick peek at soft proofs for hue which are a whole
different
> kettle of fish.) Once you have selected your ink and paper your
black and
> white points are locked in place. I find that I can work up an
image in
> Gray Gamma 2.2 and get it to my satisfaction on screen (so this is
a colour
> managed representation of the file dependent on my display's
capability and
> the accuracy of my display profile) and simply print it with the
applicable
> QTR Create ICC profile (with BPC) and know that the luminance axis
has been
> scaled properly for the black and white points dictated by my
ink/paper
> combination. I just find it works well and as a result my first
print at
> size is the level of "soft proof" I then need.
Incidentally, because I am printing through the ABW driver, I am not
linearizing the printer. The profiles on ABW that I've done reveal
what I see by eye: "darker" is quite linear down to about 70 or 80
on the wedge and then there is a shallow toe leveling off (the
compressed blacks). The "lighter" setting on the driver is a very
smooth curve with a very smooth gamma "sag" from about 20 to 80. So
it appears to me that Epson isn't doing a terible job with the
linearization of this printer, but is using (and labeling) the ABW
controls oddly: e.g. "darker" as a setting for more punch, etc.
> PS: The gamma you select when profiling the monitor does not
matter (except
> in so far as it is arguably better to use the native gamma of the
display so
> that the monitor doesn't have to contort so much when chomping on
its lookup
> tables) - the colour management module takes care of any
differences.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
> 100's is not the plural of 100
>
>
> > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 03:57:48 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] QTR and Create ICC . . .
> >
> > I have spent two days with i1 generating and trying various ICC
> > profiles created with the QTR Create-ICC. I've used both the 21
and
> > 51 step wedges, and tried the profiles with both Epson 2400
> > ABW "darker" and "light" settings.
> >
> > What is very impressive is that (using PS color mgmt. with the
> > profiles) no matter what the ABW settings the prints are virtually
> > identical (used with the correct profile for the ABW setting).
The
> > profiles and PS color management are clearly compensating for
printer
> > and Epson driver "irregularities."
> >
> > What is not impressive is that I cannot get anyhing close to a
sceen
> > match for the prints. With a monitor calibrated to 5K and 2.2 I
have
> > been unable to find a workspace profile that even remotely
previews
> > the print accurately, including the use of the i1/QTR generated
> > profiles for "soft proofing." All the screen views are much
lighter
> > than the print, and contrastier than the print, and the tonal
> > distribution is different. I can produce a hugely more accurate
> > screen view of the print with a PS curve for viewing.
> >
> > I am aware from Steve Kale's previous posts of the BPC issue with
> > Create-ICC, but the discrepancy I am experiencing seems to go way
> > beyond this. I can't see what I'm not understanding here. Any
> > thoughts about this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Walt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
resources as
> > they are often being updated.
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
wish to
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
this same
> > page.
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
messages to keep
> > them short.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
flames.
> > Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from
the membership
> > without notice.
> > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of
digital B&W
> > printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be
removed from the
> > membership.
> > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules
and
> > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the
group Owner and
> > Moderators. See ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² in the Files
section:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> >
> > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW,
THE PRINT
> > YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE ³OWNER²
AND
> > ³MODERATORS² OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU
> > FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
EXEMPLARY
> > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF
PROFITS, GOODWILL,
> > USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE ³OWNER² AND
³MODERATORS² OF
> > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
> > DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE
DIGITAL BW,
> > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION
OF YOUR
> > TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD
PARTY ON THE
> > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER
RELATING TO THE
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >