Digital BW, The Print

Here's a question I've been curious about:

 

Photoshop's "Print with Preview" has a section just below the preview where
one can switch between "Color Management" and "Output."  

 

"Color Management" has an option to "Let Photoshop Determine Colors."  At
that point you can enter a number of "Printer Profiles."  These appear to be
ICCs, about which I have very limited expertise. 

 

"Output" has an option  -- "Transfer" - that allows one to incorporate
"Transfer Functions" into the normal PS printing workflow.  At this point a
curve made in Photoshop Curves Adjustment section will also work.  

 

How do these 2 parallel print control workflows - curves v. ICC - compare
when used in the PS "Print with Preview" workflow approach?  

 

What are the curves and ICC making and linearizing options?  Are ICCs a
uniform file format or are there multiple file types such that an "ICC" made
in one application is useless in another application?  

 

Does one approach preserve more of the grayscale steps than the other?

 

I'd appreciate learning how these 2 approaches compare and might be used for
easy fine tuning or "linearization" of the printer ramp.

 

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The ICC profiles are of a very specific file type and description as
outlined by the International Colour Consortium.  You can get the
specification from www.color.org.  Therefore, subject to spec version
changes, there is just one type of file and ICC profile capable applications
can use any profile that meets the spec for which they are compliant.

As far as greyscale is concerned, an ICC profile is sort of similar to what
I believe a transfer curve is in the sense that typically a greyscale ICC
profile comprises the mandatory header information, the paper white point
(wtpt tag) and a tag called kTRC.  kTRC is a curve describing the stimulus
response behaviour of the printer/ink/driver/paper combination.  The data is
scaled in XYZ to the media white point, ie it is media relative.  Therefore
the curve runs from the very top right to some point on the left y axis
equivalent to the black point of the output as scaled for white point.  If
you build into the ICC profile kTRC tag black point compensation then the
curve will hit 0,0.  Therefore one can, via a transfer curve, cause the same
sort of luminance adjustment that an ICC profile can achieve.  You just need
to know the points for the transfer curve.  There exists at the ICC site a
white paper by Adobe on how they do their BPC (which fills a gap in the ICC
spec).  In essence, it is a scaling of the stimulus-response behaviour of
the black end of the curve in XYZ similar to the media relative white point
scaling.

Therefore as I understand it, one could theoretically achieve the same thing
with either approach.  However, the transfer function in PS (and other
apps), if I recall correctly, limits the number of points.

The old QTR Create ICC app essentially created a kTRC (k for greyscale) from
the input data.  WTPT scaling was done and, depending on the version of QTR
Create ICC, BPC scaling was done.  So you can go into one of these profiles
and take a look at the kTRC tag and see the curve I am talking about.  For
colour ICC profiles one could take the curve approach and have an rTRC,
bTRC, and gTRC.  In general terms, though, the TRC (tonal response curve)
approach is deemed insufficient for most devices and lookup tables are
preferred, specifically A to B and B to A tables. There is a pair for each
rendering intent.  One for PCS (Profile Connection Space - currently can
only be XYZ or CIELab) to device conversion and one for device to PCS
conversion.  The new/current QTR Create ICC app takes advantage of this and
uses A2B0 and B2A0 (perceptual) tags.  This allows Roy to have colour
information one way - for soft proofing - but not the other way - for
controlling the luminance output of the printer.  (The only issue with the
current version of QTR Create ICC is that Roy is scaling the soft proofing
data for luminance only and not all three elements of the wtpt.  Hence paper
white isn't yet shown as monitor white without Simulate Paper White checked
in a PS soft proof and when Simulate Paper White is checked there is a hue
imperfection.)

Hope this helps

Steve

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:14:39 -0700
> To: DigitalB&WPrint <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Here's a question I've been curious about:
> 
>  
> 
> Photoshop's "Print with Preview" has a section just below the preview where
> one can switch between "Color Management" and "Output."
> 
>  
> 
> "Color Management" has an option to "Let Photoshop Determine Colors."  At
> that point you can enter a number of "Printer Profiles."  These appear to be
> ICCs, about which I have very limited expertise.
> 
>  
> 
> "Output" has an option  -- "Transfer" - that allows one to incorporate
> "Transfer Functions" into the normal PS printing workflow.  At this point a
> curve made in Photoshop Curves Adjustment section will also work.
> 
>  
> 
> How do these 2 parallel print control workflows - curves v. ICC - compare
> when used in the PS "Print with Preview" workflow approach?
> 
>  
> 
> What are the curves and ICC making and linearizing options?  Are ICCs a
> uniform file format or are there multiple file types such that an "ICC" made
> in one application is useless in another application?
> 
>  
> 
> Does one approach preserve more of the grayscale steps than the other?
> 
>  
> 
> I'd appreciate learning how these 2 approaches compare and might be used for
> easy fine tuning or "linearization" of the printer ramp.
> 
>  
> 
> Paul
> 
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>
> 
>  
>

One other thing, a transfer curve function doesn't typically allow you to
alter the two end points.  So a transfer curve can simulate a BPC-embedded
ICC profile (which would technically be non-spec) but not a non-BPC ICC
profile.  A transfer curve can of course be any shape you want in between.
The ICC profile approach measures the ACTUAL stimulus-response behaviour of
the printer and does the scaling of white point as per the spec.  Hence the
shape of the curve is defined by the spec and the behaviour of the printer.
Hope that makes sense!

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:45:43 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> The ICC profiles are of a very specific file type and description as
> outlined by the International Colour Consortium.  You can get the
> specification from www.color.org.  Therefore, subject to spec version
> changes, there is just one type of file and ICC profile capable applications
> can use any profile that meets the spec for which they are compliant.
> 
> As far as greyscale is concerned, an ICC profile is sort of similar to what
> I believe a transfer curve is in the sense that typically a greyscale ICC
> profile comprises the mandatory header information, the paper white point
> (wtpt tag) and a tag called kTRC.  kTRC is a curve describing the stimulus
> response behaviour of the printer/ink/driver/paper combination.  The data is
> scaled in XYZ to the media white point, ie it is media relative.  Therefore
> the curve runs from the very top right to some point on the left y axis
> equivalent to the black point of the output as scaled for white point.  If
> you build into the ICC profile kTRC tag black point compensation then the
> curve will hit 0,0.  Therefore one can, via a transfer curve, cause the same
> sort of luminance adjustment that an ICC profile can achieve.  You just need
> to know the points for the transfer curve.  There exists at the ICC site a
> white paper by Adobe on how they do their BPC (which fills a gap in the ICC
> spec).  In essence, it is a scaling of the stimulus-response behaviour of
> the black end of the curve in XYZ similar to the media relative white point
> scaling.
> 
> Therefore as I understand it, one could theoretically achieve the same thing
> with either approach.  However, the transfer function in PS (and other
> apps), if I recall correctly, limits the number of points.
> 
> The old QTR Create ICC app essentially created a kTRC (k for greyscale) from
> the input data.  WTPT scaling was done and, depending on the version of QTR
> Create ICC, BPC scaling was done.  So you can go into one of these profiles
> and take a look at the kTRC tag and see the curve I am talking about.  For
> colour ICC profiles one could take the curve approach and have an rTRC,
> bTRC, and gTRC.  In general terms, though, the TRC (tonal response curve)
> approach is deemed insufficient for most devices and lookup tables are
> preferred, specifically A to B and B to A tables. There is a pair for each
> rendering intent.  One for PCS (Profile Connection Space - currently can
> only be XYZ or CIELab) to device conversion and one for device to PCS
> conversion.  The new/current QTR Create ICC app takes advantage of this and
> uses A2B0 and B2A0 (perceptual) tags.  This allows Roy to have colour
> information one way - for soft proofing - but not the other way - for
> controlling the luminance output of the printer.  (The only issue with the
> current version of QTR Create ICC is that Roy is scaling the soft proofing
> data for luminance only and not all three elements of the wtpt.  Hence paper
> white isn't yet shown as monitor white without Simulate Paper White checked
> in a PS soft proof and when Simulate Paper White is checked there is a hue
> imperfection.)
> 
> Hope this helps
> 
> Steve

I need to correct myself re my end points comment. PS allows a transfer
function that shifts the end points.

If you are thinking of linearising a printer or adjusting image luminance
via the transfer curve this ought to be possible.  The trick will be in
computing the relevant coordinates.  Think unadjusted image file (input) on
the y axis, trace out to the curve and then down to the adjusted file value
(output) on the x axis. The printer is then sent this new value which of
course is printed differently from the old value. (Confirm that a curve with
imperfect black and no black point compensation clips non-reproducable
blacks to the darkest black. This is obviously undesirable and hence you
would incorporate BPC into your calculations.)

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:56:59 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> One other thing, a transfer curve function doesn't typically allow you to
> alter the two end points.  So a transfer curve can simulate a BPC-embedded
> ICC profile (which would technically be non-spec) but not a non-BPC ICC
> profile.  A transfer curve can of course be any shape you want in between.
> The ICC profile approach measures the ACTUAL stimulus-response behaviour of
> the printer and does the scaling of white point as per the spec.  Hence the
> shape of the curve is defined by the spec and the behaviour of the printer.
> Hope that makes sense!
> 
> 
>> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:45:43 +0100
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>> 
>> The ICC profiles are of a very specific file type and description as
>> outlined by the International Colour Consortium.  You can get the
>> specification from www.color.org.  Therefore, subject to spec version
>> changes, there is just one type of file and ICC profile capable applications
>> can use any profile that meets the spec for which they are compliant.
>> 
>> As far as greyscale is concerned, an ICC profile is sort of similar to what
>> I believe a transfer curve is in the sense that typically a greyscale ICC
>> profile comprises the mandatory header information, the paper white point
>> (wtpt tag) and a tag called kTRC.  kTRC is a curve describing the stimulus
>> response behaviour of the printer/ink/driver/paper combination.  The data is
>> scaled in XYZ to the media white point, ie it is media relative.  Therefore
>> the curve runs from the very top right to some point on the left y axis
>> equivalent to the black point of the output as scaled for white point.  If
>> you build into the ICC profile kTRC tag black point compensation then the
>> curve will hit 0,0.  Therefore one can, via a transfer curve, cause the same
>> sort of luminance adjustment that an ICC profile can achieve.  You just need
>> to know the points for the transfer curve.  There exists at the ICC site a
>> white paper by Adobe on how they do their BPC (which fills a gap in the ICC
>> spec).  In essence, it is a scaling of the stimulus-response behaviour of
>> the black end of the curve in XYZ similar to the media relative white point
>> scaling.
>> 
>> Therefore as I understand it, one could theoretically achieve the same thing
>> with either approach.  However, the transfer function in PS (and other
>> apps), if I recall correctly, limits the number of points.
>> 
>> The old QTR Create ICC app essentially created a kTRC (k for greyscale) from
>> the input data.  WTPT scaling was done and, depending on the version of QTR
>> Create ICC, BPC scaling was done.  So you can go into one of these profiles
>> and take a look at the kTRC tag and see the curve I am talking about.  For
>> colour ICC profiles one could take the curve approach and have an rTRC,
>> bTRC, and gTRC.  In general terms, though, the TRC (tonal response curve)
>> approach is deemed insufficient for most devices and lookup tables are
>> preferred, specifically A to B and B to A tables. There is a pair for each
>> rendering intent.  One for PCS (Profile Connection Space - currently can
>> only be XYZ or CIELab) to device conversion and one for device to PCS
>> conversion.  The new/current QTR Create ICC app takes advantage of this and
>> uses A2B0 and B2A0 (perceptual) tags.  This allows Roy to have colour
>> information one way - for soft proofing - but not the other way - for
>> controlling the luminance output of the printer.  (The only issue with the
>> current version of QTR Create ICC is that Roy is scaling the soft proofing
>> data for luminance only and not all three elements of the wtpt.  Hence paper
>> white isn't yet shown as monitor white without Simulate Paper White checked
>> in a PS soft proof and when Simulate Paper White is checked there is a hue
>> imperfection.)
>> 
>> Hope this helps
>> 
>> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 „Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines‰ 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 „OWNER‰ AND
> „MODERATORS‰ 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  „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ 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
> DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>

Steve,

> 
> The ICC profiles are of a very specific file type and description as
> outlined by the International Colour Consortium.  You can get the
> specification from www.color.org.  Therefore, subject to spec version
> changes, there is just one type of file and ICC profile capable
> applications
> can use any profile that meets the spec for which they are compliant.

There are a number of ways to make an ICC for different purposes.  For
example, we make ICCs in Photoshop to modify the monitor view (or "soft
proof" it).  QTR can make ICCs.  Are these the same type of file?  Can
either or both be used in the Print with Preview workflow?

> 
> As far as greyscale is concerned, an ICC profile is sort of similar to
> what
> I believe a transfer curve is in the sense that typically a greyscale ICC
> profile comprises the mandatory header information, the paper white point
> (wtpt tag) and a tag called kTRC.

> ... a transfer curve function doesn't typically allow you to
> alter the two end points.  

I agree, but that has not been a problem for most printers (7600 aside).

>  kTRC is a curve describing the stimulus
> response behaviour of the printer/ink/driver/paper combination.

This is probably where the similarity is, but perhaps coded differently.

I call this graph or relationship an input-output curve.

> The data is
> scaled in XYZ to the media white point, ie it is media relative.

Like Lab, is XYZ an absolute luminance scale?

Unless one is using glop, I can't see many situations where I'd want to tell
the printer to put any ink in my 0% highlights.  

I think the loading for the black point may be where there would be more
practical difference, but aside from the 7600, I almost always found an
Epson paper type that worked for controlling loading and gave essentially
the best dmax.  As was noted in a recent thread, most of the good matte
papers seem to be able to handle about the same load.

> Therefore
> the curve runs from the very top right to some point on the left y axis
> equivalent to the black point of the output as scaled for white point.  If
> you build into the ICC profile kTRC tag black point compensation then the
> curve will hit 0,0.


So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?



>  Therefore one can, via a transfer curve, cause the same
> sort of luminance adjustment that an ICC profile can achieve.  
> You just need to know the points for the transfer curve.

Yes, and in that respect, I think there will always need to be a variety of
ways to determine this, including manually and visually.

As long as the loading is set right with the Epson paper type selection, it
would appear a Transfer Function could do essentially the same input-output
mapping function as an ICC or "linearizing" function in another rip. 

> Therefore as I understand it, one could theoretically achieve the same
> thing with either approach.  However, the transfer function in PS 
> (and other apps), if I recall correctly, limits the number of points.

Yes, it uses less than I'd ideally like.  Is there a limit in the ICC
format?

> The old QTR Create ICC app essentially created a kTRC (k for greyscale)
> from the input data.  WTPT scaling was done and, depending on the
> version of QTR Create ICC, BPC scaling was done.  

> So you can go into one of these profiles
> and take a look at the kTRC tag and see the curve I am talking about.

If the ICC files are all the same in the way they deal with a grayscale
curve, is it the interface with the curve or input-output tabel that
distinguishes them?

I note that the section of PS that makes the custom dot gain curves -- which
are saved as ICCs -- does not appear to be able to open the QTR ICCs.

>  For colour ICC profiles ...

Too much information for now and a B&W guy.



> In general terms, though, the TRC (tonal response curve)
> approach is deemed insufficient for most devices and lookup tables are
> preferred, specifically A to B and B to A tables.

Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take interface?

Is there a graphical curve system?  

Is there a way to relate a PS curve to this system?



> There is a pair for each rendering intent. 

> One for PCS (Profile Connection Space - currently can
> only be XYZ or CIELab) to device conversion and one for device to PCS
> conversion. 

Can you explain these spaces and where they are used?  

> The new/current QTR Create ICC app takes advantage of this and
> uses A2B0 and B2A0 (perceptual) tags.

Do these tags relate to what you've said above?

>  This allows Roy to have colour
> information one way - for soft proofing - but not the other way - for
> controlling the luminance output of the printer. 

To simplify, I'm really interested only in the luminance end right now.

> (The only issue with the
> current version of QTR Create ICC is that Roy is scaling the soft proofing
> data for luminance only 

Good.

> Hope this helps

Yes, I hope within the limited B&W fine-tuning or linearization, and  also
perhaps monitor matching contexts, I can understand the options.  Probably
dealing with just the printer output end is the place to concentrate
initially.  

My goal is to find the easiest way to fine tune or linearize a basic
monotone inkset -- manually and/or with instruments -- within the normal PS
printing procedures as well as others.  It sounds like ICCs and Transfer
Functions can be used in a Print with Preview workflow in PS almost
interchangeably, but perhaps with the advantage of more points going to the
ICC approach.  Does this sound correct? 

Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a Windows XP user
can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with Preview
workflow and then the Epson driver?


Thanks.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> 
> I need to correct myself re my end points comment. PS allows a transfer
> function that shifts the end points.

Yes, I missed that also.  


> 
> If you are thinking of linearising a printer or adjusting image luminance
> via the transfer curve this ought to be possible.  The trick will be in
> computing the relevant coordinates.

I modify curves all the time.   I am attempted to make a simple tutorial for
these curves at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/EZ_Adjustment_Curves.htm 

One can load the Image Adjustment *.acv curves into the Transfer Function
section of Print with Preview.  This avoids the risk of messing up a working
image file.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Yes you can but you have to compute the points beforehand.  In essence to
replicate what an ICC profile does you simply need to go through the same
maths that is required by the ICC spec plus BPC.  Read the data, scale in
XYZ for white point, and then scale for BPC.  The outbound portion of what
QTR Create ICC does is simply automating this measurement, calculation and
adjustment transformation curve.  The inbound (ie to monitor for soft
proofing) is a whole different kettle of fish.

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:45:28 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
>> 
>> I need to correct myself re my end points comment. PS allows a transfer
>> function that shifts the end points.
> 
> Yes, I missed that also.
> 
> 
>> 
>> If you are thinking of linearising a printer or adjusting image luminance
>> via the transfer curve this ought to be possible.  The trick will be in
>> computing the relevant coordinates.
> 
> I modify curves all the time.   I am attempted to make a simple tutorial for
> these curves at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/EZ_Adjustment_Curves.htm
> 
> One can load the Image Adjustment *.acv curves into the Transfer Function
> section of Print with Preview.  This avoids the risk of messing up a working
> image file.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

> ... The outbound portion of what
> QTR Create ICC does is simply automating this measurement, calculation and
> adjustment transformation curve. 

Yes, and it requires the i1 or similar, I assume.

Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure with the Epson
driver?

I use an X-Rite for my curves and simply input the points manually in
Photoshop curves.  I don't find it a problem, but I understand that
automation is needed for many.  I hope my tutorial helps those who want to
do it via eyeball.

What I'm shooting for in a universal EZ B&W hextone (+ maybe septone)
approach.  (I can make inks from K3 as well as MIS if needed -- no one gets
a monopoly here.)  I'll help make the initial curves for the different
printers, but I want a very low entry barrier, student and starving
artist-compatibel, system that uses the Epson driver.  I'd really welcome
the QTR ICC approach alongside the manual PS curves approach to linearizing.
One advantage of the ICC approach is that PS Elements can use them and not
Transfer Functions -- at least in the Elements version I have.


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Quick response:


> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:39:18 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve,
> 
>> 
>> The ICC profiles are of a very specific file type and description as
>> outlined by the International Colour Consortium.  You can get the
>> specification from www.color.org.  Therefore, subject to spec version
>> changes, there is just one type of file and ICC profile capable
>> applications
>> can use any profile that meets the spec for which they are compliant.
> 
> There are a number of ways to make an ICC for different purposes.  For
> example, we make ICCs in Photoshop to modify the monitor view (or "soft
> proof" it).  QTR can make ICCs.  Are these the same type of file?  Can
> either or both be used in the Print with Preview workflow?

Each tag has a defined structure as per the spec.  Profiles several of these
prescribed tags to make a profile. Different tags have different purposes.
A profile generator can also have custom tags which have been registered
with the ICC.


>>  kTRC is a curve describing the stimulus
>> response behaviour of the printer/ink/driver/paper combination.
> 
> This is probably where the similarity is, but perhaps coded differently.
> 
> I call this graph or relationship an input-output curve.
> 
>> The data is
>> scaled in XYZ to the media white point, ie it is media relative.
> 
> Like Lab, is XYZ an absolute luminance scale?

Not sure what you mean by this.  XYZ_Y can actually exceed 100 but for
printed media the max is 100 and equates to L*=100.  If say your paper came
in at XYZ_Y=96 then the ICC profile will incorporate data that has been
scaled so that this is upped to 100.

> 
> Unless one is using glop, I can't see many situations where I'd want to tell
> the printer to put any ink in my 0% highlights.
> 
> I think the loading for the black point may be where there would be more
> practical difference, but aside from the 7600, I almost always found an
> Epson paper type that worked for controlling loading and gave essentially
> the best dmax.  As was noted in a recent thread, most of the good matte
> papers seem to be able to handle about the same load.
> 
>> Therefore
>> the curve runs from the very top right to some point on the left y axis
>> equivalent to the black point of the output as scaled for white point.  If
>> you build into the ICC profile kTRC tag black point compensation then the
>> curve will hit 0,0.
> 
> 
> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?

Yes.  Let's say the PCS was Lab and you had a perfectly linear printer from
L*=10 to L* =96.  The tonal response of the printer can be described by a
straight line from 0,10 to 100,96 (normalised scale).  But the ICC spec
requires media relative data and we don't want our highlights clipped.  So
the data which makes up the straight line from 0,10 to 100,96 is scaled in
XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y) such that the top right is 100,100 - but
note all the other points have been altered by the scaling.  Without doing
the maths, let's say the new black end is at 0,13.  Without BPC every pixel
in the normalised range from 0 to 13 is clipped.  BPC scales the data such
that the curve begins at 0,0.  So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer possibly can.


> 
> 
> 
>>  Therefore one can, via a transfer curve, cause the same
>> sort of luminance adjustment that an ICC profile can achieve.
>> You just need to know the points for the transfer curve.
> 
> Yes, and in that respect, I think there will always need to be a variety of
> ways to determine this, including manually and visually.
> 
> As long as the loading is set right with the Epson paper type selection, it
> would appear a Transfer Function could do essentially the same input-output
> mapping function as an ICC or "linearizing" function in another rip.

Yes as noted they do the same thing for the outbound portion of the ICC
profile.  QTR Create ICC incorporates hue into the proofing (inbound to
monitor) portion.

> 
>> Therefore as I understand it, one could theoretically achieve the same
>> thing with either approach.  However, the transfer function in PS
>> (and other apps), if I recall correctly, limits the number of points.
> 
> Yes, it uses less than I'd ideally like.  Is there a limit in the ICC
> format?

No but for all practical purposes 51 steps is likely more than enough.
> 
>> The old QTR Create ICC app essentially created a kTRC (k for greyscale)
>> from the input data.  WTPT scaling was done and, depending on the
>> version of QTR Create ICC, BPC scaling was done.
> 
>> So you can go into one of these profiles
>> and take a look at the kTRC tag and see the curve I am talking about.
> 
> If the ICC files are all the same in the way they deal with a grayscale
> curve, is it the interface with the curve or input-output tabel that
> distinguishes them?
> 
> I note that the section of PS that makes the custom dot gain curves -- which
> are saved as ICCs -- does not appear to be able to open the QTR ICCs.

The custom dot gain function is what I was getting confused with before re
end points (you can't move them).  It similar but not really the same thing.
I do not profess to understand it but believe the concept is the same -
adjust pixel values to accommodate dot expansion on paper.
> 
>>  For colour ICC profiles ...
> 
> Too much information for now and a B&W guy.

Worth following through with though.  The concept is the same just 3D
instead of one D.  
> 
> 
> 
>> In general terms, though, the TRC (tonal response curve)
>> approach is deemed insufficient for most devices and lookup tables are
>> preferred, specifically A to B and B to A tables.
> 
> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take interface?

Now it is.  Before not.  See below.
> 
> Is there a graphical curve system?

You can view the contents of an ICC profile in Colorsync (Mac) or with the
utility available at the color.org site under ICC Resource Center.

> 
> Is there a way to relate a PS curve to this system?

Yes they are essentially the same thing.  When I was exploring this stuff
and asking questions about it of a color scientist he kept saying that we
could achieve the same thing with a curve.  At the time I did not understand
the response.
> 
> 
> 
>> There is a pair for each rendering intent.
> 
>> One for PCS (Profile Connection Space - currently can
>> only be XYZ or CIELab) to device conversion and one for device to PCS
>> conversion. 
> 
> Can you explain these spaces and where they are used?

In short ;-) a Profile Connection Space is a space which can act as an
intermediary between other colour spaces ie it is not device dependent.  An
input space, eg scanner profile, describes how to translate from the input
space to the intermediate space.  An output space, eg printer profile,
describes how to get from the intermediate space to the printer space.  All
transformations pass through this intermediate space.  I encourage you to
make your way through the white papers here:

http://www.color.org/whitepapers.html

And the appendices to the spec itself.  Bruce Fraser's Real World Colour
Management is also helpful as an intro.
> 
>> The new/current QTR Create ICC app takes advantage of this and
>> uses A2B0 and B2A0 (perceptual) tags.
> 
> Do these tags relate to what you've said above?

Yes.  A2BO is device to PCS. B2A0 is PCS to device.  So B2A0 is used to
manage luminance out.  A2B0 contains full Lab info so that we can soft proof
hue as well as luminance. 0 denotes the perceptual intent.
> 
>>  This allows Roy to have colour
>> information one way - for soft proofing - but not the other way - for
>> controlling the luminance output of the printer.
> 
> To simplify, I'm really interested only in the luminance end right now.

Colorsync gives you a picture of the table in graphical form (not sure about
the PC utility).  (Roy can explain the intricacies of how he programmed the
tags.  I am describing their purpose and general form.)  You can see that
the B2A0 tag has just got gray info (and that it is BPC adjusted.  By
contrast, you can see L, a and b info in the A2B0 tag.

Once you've got the outbound part the inbound part slots in place so you are
focusing on the right area for now.
> 
>> (The only issue with the
>> current version of QTR Create ICC is that Roy is scaling the soft proofing
>> data for luminance only
> 
> Good.

Actually not good.  His aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
Luminance is ok but hue is off a little.  He understands the issue and we
narrowed the problem down only just before he left for a photo expedition.
I am sure it will be corrected soon.  I guess it's good in that at least he
luminance is right!


> 
>> Hope this helps
> 
> Yes, I hope within the limited B&W fine-tuning or linearization, and  also
> perhaps monitor matching contexts, I can understand the options.  Probably
> dealing with just the printer output end is the place to concentrate
> initially.  

Yes.  It really isn't that hard for greyscale.  The areas we kept getting
stuck on was understanding that the information going into the ICC profile
had to be scaled for the white point (so highlights weren't clipped) and
that BPC plugs a whole in the ICC spec for the black point end of things.

Start by thinking only about the kTRC tag and what it is describing. (The
tabular version is the same info in a different format and allows one the
ability to describe the situation in both directions and potentially
differently for each ie add a* and b* info to the soft proof direction.)
Also focus on a  printer perfectly linear with respect to L*.  The kTRC
describes the tonal response of the printer in terms of the PCS.  So a Lab
PCS is easy because then a linear L* printer will be a straight line kTRC.
The XYZ_Y equivalent of the same thing is a curve.

So with CIELab as the PCS, if a printer maxes black at L*=15 and paper white
is L*=97 (generally normal for matte paper) one would describe the tonal
response of the printer as a straight line from 0,15 to 100,96.  But the
spec requires, as do we, that the TRC be media (white point) relative.  We
require it because we don't want a transform that clips the highlights.  So
the data going into the kTRC is scaled with respect to the paper white
luminance.  All scaling is done in XYZ_Y - makes sense.  So the scaled data
is a curve which extends not to 100,96 but to 100,100.  All other points are
adjusted accordingly.  Without BPC the black end gets clipped.  So we can
either ask PS to do the BPC or do it in the ICC profile/transfer curve
ourselves.  Roy decided to embed it in the B2A0 tag and hence if you look at
this tag you see the graph of the table extending to 0,0.
> 
> My goal is to find the easiest way to fine tune or linearize a basic
> monotone inkset -- manually and/or with instruments -- within the normal PS
> printing procedures as well as others.  It sounds like ICCs and Transfer
> Functions can be used in a Print with Preview workflow in PS almost
> interchangeably, but perhaps with the advantage of more points going to the
> ICC approach.  Does this sound correct?

For B&W they can achieve the same thing.  ICC profiles have the advantage
that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.  I do not know the
limit on transfer curve points but there is a practical useful limit anyway.
All you are doing is providing an adjustment to pixel values such that they
print with the "right" luminance.  Calculating the "right luminance"
involves and understanding of white point compensation and black point
compensation and the rescaling that is done for each in XYZ (or for our
purposes XYZ_Y).
> 
> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a Windows XP user
> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with Preview
> workflow and then the Epson driver?
>
Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with the workflow
of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of settings.  Scan the
step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the sort of data
QTR Create ICC can read. (Roy extended the data flexibility but because I
have an Eye One I have not focused on this.  Check his announcement of the
new version.)  If you would like I can describe in more detail how to do
this with an EyeOne device and MeasureTool.  Once you have the output from
Measuretool just drag and drop it on the QTR Create ICC app logo.  A PC user
can help correct this if my description is incorrect.

Sorry this is rushed - especially since we are trying to cover a lot of
ground. 

Steve

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>

> 
>> ... The outbound portion of what
>> QTR Create ICC does is simply automating this measurement, calculation and
>> adjustment transformation curve.
> 
> Yes, and it requires the i1 or similar, I assume.

It requires a device which can measure luminance.  If you are not worried
about soft proofing for hue then you could simply plug the a* and b* data
with zeros.  If you want to proof hue then the device needs to be a
spectrophotometer. You just need to get the data in the form that QTR Create
ICC can read it.  It then does the scaling etc and generates the specific
type of file that the ICC spec demands - not insignificant work.


> 
> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure with the Epson
> driver?

Some clarification.  When you are in Print with Preview you have not left PS
yet.  Here you are telling PS to either do or not do a conversion of the
file data for a selected ICC profile BEFORE hand off to the Epson driver.

Answer:  Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv B&W
settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I do not mess
with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer to edit the
image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing ability.

> 
> I use an X-Rite for my curves and simply input the points manually in
> Photoshop curves.  I don't find it a problem, but I understand that
> automation is needed for many.  I hope my tutorial helps those who want to
> do it via eyeball.
> 
> What I'm shooting for in a universal EZ B&W hextone (+ maybe septone)
> approach.  (I can make inks from K3 as well as MIS if needed -- no one gets
> a monopoly here.)  I'll help make the initial curves for the different
> printers, but I want a very low entry barrier, student and starving
> artist-compatibel, system that uses the Epson driver.  I'd really welcome
> the QTR ICC approach alongside the manual PS curves approach to linearizing.
> One advantage of the ICC approach is that PS Elements can use them and not
> Transfer Functions -- at least in the Elements version I have.

One area worth a lot of thought is the thing I mentioned above.  QTR Create
ICC simply needs the data set up in the right way.  If you don't want to
soft proof hue then you don't need to measure a* and b* and can simply plug
the data with zeros.  So now all you need is a densitometer and a method for
getting data organised in the right format.  Now you're down to a cheap
densitometer and a $50 shareware fee.  That's really not that bad.

I can attest to the enormous amount of work Roy put into QTR Create ICC.  I
guess I understand it a reasonable amount - I never tried to get into the
actual math of the scaling - and I've described in summary form in this
thread a lot of ground that took Roy (and I) weeks/months to understand.  He
then had to go on and programme it which simply left me in the dust.  To do
the transfer curve approach you at least need to programme all the scaling
maths (even if just in a spreadsheet).  I have no idea how someone would go
about eyeballing that.  I would have thought the cheap densitometer, data
formatting guide (or Roy's expansion of the data flexibility of QTR Create
ICC) and the $50 shareware fee would be an admirable cheap entry point.

Steve,

>...

> > So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?
> 
> Yes.  ...

OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I understand it.


> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)

I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?

>...
> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.  
> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer possibly can.

This is what I'd want.

> ...

> > Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take interface?
> 
> Now it is. 


I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
"QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it require i1?
(It's in the i1 folder.)



> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.

Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting now it's
complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.

> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.

That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the custom dot gain
curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.


...
> > Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a 
> > Windows XP user
> > can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with Preview
> > workflow and then the Epson driver?
> >
> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with the workflow
> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of settings.  Scan
> the
> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the sort of
> data
> QTR Create ICC can read. ...

I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a momentary
flash on the monitor.




> > Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure 
> > with the Epson driver?
> 

>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv B&W
> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I do not mess
> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer to edit the
> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing ability.

The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as possible is
that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the driver -- with no
loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with Preview -- or
anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each transformation.

Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make the ICCs at
this point.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 
 



>

Paul,

A simple text file with a column of Lab L values or density values  
measured from a 21 step wedge is probably all you need (use a column  
heading of D for density values or L for Lab L values).  Just drag  
and drop the text file onto the Create-icc script and it should  
create both the icc profile and a text file with a plot of the data.

Carl

On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Paul Roark wrote:

> Steve,
>
>
>> ...
>>
>
>
>>> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?
>>>
>>
>> Yes.  ...
>>
>
> OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I  
> understand it.
>
>
>
>> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
>>
>
> I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?
>
>
>> ...
>> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
>> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
>> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer possibly  
>> can.
>>
>
> This is what I'd want.
>
>
>> ...
>>
>
>
>>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take interface?
>>>
>>
>> Now it is.
>>
>
>
> I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
> "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it  
> require i1?
> (It's in the i1 folder.)
>
>
>
>
>> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
>>
>
> Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting now  
> it's
> complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.
>
>
>> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
>> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
>>
>
> That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the custom  
> dot gain
> curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.
>
>
> ...
>
>>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a
>>> Windows XP user
>>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with  
>>> Preview
>>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
>>>
>>>
>> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with the  
>> workflow
>> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of  
>> settings.  Scan
>> the
>> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the  
>> sort of
>> data
>> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
>>
>
> I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a  
> momentary
> flash on the monitor.
>
>
>
>
>
>>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
>>> with the Epson driver?
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv B&W
>> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I do  
>> not mess
>> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer to  
>> edit the
>> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing  
>> ability.
>>
>
> The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as  
> possible is
> that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the driver --  
> with no
> loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with Preview  
> -- or
> anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each transformation.
>
> Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make the  
> ICCs at
> this point.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello Paul,

>I hope my tutorial helps those who want to do it via eyeball.

It looks real good, thorough and clearly explained.  I think it will
be very helpful for beginners (and starving artists <g>).  It's clear
a lot of work and thought went into it.


>...ICC approach...PS Elements can use them and not Transfer Functions 

This is one advantage of using adjustment curves in the image (a
choice you mentioned in the tutorial) rather than TF curves.  Another
is that while developing the curve any changes can be seen on screen,
so you have some idea of what effect you're having.  With TF curves
you have to make the next print to see what you've done.  I found in
the long run that using adj curves saves much time, ink and paper, and
I finally stopped using TF curves altogether.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Carl,

Are you using Windows XP?  I think one problem I'm having is that the Create
ICC program doesn't seem to want to run at all.  I assume this is a
different program than the Create Curve program -- or am I totally confused?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Schofield
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:02 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> A simple text file with a column of Lab L values or density values
> measured from a 21 step wedge is probably all you need (use a column
> heading of D for density values or L for Lab L values).  Just drag
> and drop the text file onto the Create-icc script and it should
> create both the icc profile and a text file with a plot of the data.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
> 
> > Steve,
> >
> >
> >> ...
> >>
> >
> >
> >>> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes.  ...
> >>
> >
> > OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I
> > understand it.
> >
> >
> >
> >> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
> >>
> >
> > I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?
> >
> >
> >> ...
> >> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
> >> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
> >> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer possibly
> >> can.
> >>
> >
> > This is what I'd want.
> >
> >
> >> ...
> >>
> >
> >
> >>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take interface?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Now it is.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
> > "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it
> > require i1?
> > (It's in the i1 folder.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
> >>
> >
> > Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting now
> > it's
> > complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.
> >
> >
> >> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
> >> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
> >>
> >
> > That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the custom
> > dot gain
> > curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.
> >
> >
> > ...
> >
> >>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a
> >>> Windows XP user
> >>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with
> >>> Preview
> >>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with the
> >> workflow
> >> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of
> >> settings.  Scan
> >> the
> >> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the
> >> sort of
> >> data
> >> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
> >>
> >
> > I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a
> > momentary
> > flash on the monitor.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
> >>> with the Epson driver?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv B&W
> >> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I do
> >> not mess
> >> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer to
> >> edit the
> >> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing
> >> ability.
> >>
> >
> > The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as
> > possible is
> > that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the driver --
> > with no
> > loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with Preview
> > -- or
> > anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each transformation.
> >
> > Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make the
> > ICCs at
> > this point.
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
> MODERATORS 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
> OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Clayton,

... 
> >...ICC approach...PS Elements can use them and not Transfer Functions
> 
> This is one advantage of using adjustment curves in the image ...

Elements does not include curves adjustments, unfortunately.  The ICC,
however, might be a way Elements users can linearize their systems without
the curves (or TFs, which may use the same engine internally).

I think full PS is great, but I wouldn't if I were a student.  The initial
expense is a barrier for lots of people.


> ... I found in
> the long run that using adj curves saves much time, ink and paper, and
> I finally stopped using TF curves altogether.

I agree if it's for image adjustment, but I think it may have a place in a
printing system.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

To try and clarify:  The Create ICC.exe is a "droplet" program.  You 
take the text file with the data and drag and drop it onto the 
program (and not a shortcut to the program). Create ICC will then 
create the ICC profile in the same folder as the text file.  When you 
do this, a window will open momentarily while the program is creating 
the ICC profile,  but the program does not "run."  I keep a copy of 
the program on my desktop (not a shortcut to the program) and then 
drag and drop the text file on it.  I then have the ICC profiles on 
the desktop and move them to the color folder.

There is a text file in the Eye One folder of the QTR folder and it 
explains the use of the program.  Although Steve has described 
something different, I had problems with the output (to the printer) 
with Create ICC 2.3.1, so I have returned to the version in QTR 
2.3.0.  In a post on the QTR forum, Roy actually suggested using the 
2.3.0 for output until he corrected the problems in 2.3.1.

Best,
Walt


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> Carl,
> 
> Are you using Windows XP?  I think one problem I'm having is that 
the Create
> ICC program doesn't seem to want to run at all.  I assume this is a
> different program than the Create Curve program -- or am I totally 
confused?
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Carl
> > Schofield
> > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:02 PM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > A simple text file with a column of Lab L values or density values
> > measured from a 21 step wedge is probably all you need (use a 
column
> > heading of D for density values or L for Lab L values).  Just drag
> > and drop the text file onto the Create-icc script and it should
> > create both the icc profile and a text file with a plot of the 
data.
> > 
> > Carl
> > 
> > On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
> > 
> > > Steve,
> > >
> > >
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >>> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Yes.  ...
> > >>
> > >
> > > OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I
> > > understand it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
> > >>
> > >
> > > I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?
> > >
> > >
> > >> ...
> > >> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
> > >> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
> > >> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer 
possibly
> > >> can.
> > >>
> > >
> > > This is what I'd want.
> > >
> > >
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take 
interface?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Now it is.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
> > > "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it
> > > require i1?
> > > (It's in the i1 folder.)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting 
now
> > > it's
> > > complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.
> > >
> > >
> > >> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
> > >> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
> > >>
> > >
> > > That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the 
custom
> > > dot gain
> > > curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.
> > >
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > >>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a
> > >>> Windows XP user
> > >>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with
> > >>> Preview
> > >>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with 
the
> > >> workflow
> > >> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of
> > >> settings.  Scan
> > >> the
> > >> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the
> > >> sort of
> > >> data
> > >> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a
> > > momentary
> > > flash on the monitor.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
> > >>> with the Epson driver?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv 
B&W
> > >> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I 
do
> > >> not mess
> > >> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer 
to
> > >> edit the
> > >> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing
> > >> ability.
> > >>
> > >
> > > The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as
> > > possible is
> > > that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the 
driver --
> > > with no
> > > loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with 
Preview
> > > -- or
> > > anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each 
transformation.
> > >
> > > Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make 
the
> > > ICCs at
> > > this point.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER 
AND
> > MODERATORS 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
> > OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, 
THE

> > PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>

Walt,

Thanks for the information, that clarifies it somewhat. 

I have an X-Rite where I'll have to create the text file manually.  What
format is used?  I see what appear to be some sample files in the i1 folder,
but it's not really clear how I'd plug in the L values for the 21 steps.
Since I only have the 2.3.1, I may have to just wait until that version is
fixed.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wwodets
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 7:04 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> To try and clarify:  The Create ICC.exe is a "droplet" program.  You
> take the text file with the data and drag and drop it onto the
> program (and not a shortcut to the program). Create ICC will then
> create the ICC profile in the same folder as the text file.  When you
> do this, a window will open momentarily while the program is creating
> the ICC profile,  but the program does not "run."  I keep a copy of
> the program on my desktop (not a shortcut to the program) and then
> drag and drop the text file on it.  I then have the ICC profiles on
> the desktop and move them to the color folder.
> 
> There is a text file in the Eye One folder of the QTR folder and it
> explains the use of the program.  Although Steve has described
> something different, I had problems with the output (to the printer)
> with Create ICC 2.3.1, so I have returned to the version in QTR
> 2.3.0.  In a post on the QTR forum, Roy actually suggested using the
> 2.3.0 for output until he corrected the problems in 2.3.1.
> 
> Best,
> Walt
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> >
> > Carl,
> >
> > Are you using Windows XP?  I think one problem I'm having is that
> the Create
> > ICC program doesn't seem to want to run at all.  I assume this is a
> > different program than the Create Curve program -- or am I totally
> confused?
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of Carl
> > > Schofield
> > > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:02 PM
> > > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > A simple text file with a column of Lab L values or density values
> > > measured from a 21 step wedge is probably all you need (use a
> column
> > > heading of D for density values or L for Lab L values).  Just drag
> > > and drop the text file onto the Create-icc script and it should
> > > create both the icc profile and a text file with a plot of the
> data.
> > >
> > > Carl
> > >
> > > On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
> > >
> > > > Steve,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> ...
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> Yes.  ...
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I
> > > > understand it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> ...
> > > >> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
> > > >> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
> > > >> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer
> possibly
> > > >> can.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > This is what I'd want.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> ...
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take
> interface?
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> Now it is.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
> > > > "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it
> > > > require i1?
> > > > (It's in the i1 folder.)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting
> now
> > > > it's
> > > > complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
> > > >> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the
> custom
> > > > dot gain
> > > > curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > >>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a
> > > >>> Windows XP user
> > > >>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with
> > > >>> Preview
> > > >>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with
> the
> > > >> workflow
> > > >> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of
> > > >> settings.  Scan
> > > >> the
> > > >> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the
> > > >> sort of
> > > >> data
> > > >> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a
> > > > momentary
> > > > flash on the monitor.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
> > > >>> with the Epson driver?
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv
> B&W
> > > >> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I
> do
> > > >> not mess
> > > >> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer
> to
> > > >> edit the
> > > >> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing
> > > >> ability.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as
> > > > possible is
> > > > that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the
> driver --
> > > > with no
> > > > loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with
> Preview
> > > > -- or
> > > > anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each
> transformation.
> > > >
> > > > Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make
> the
> > > > ICCs at
> > > > this point.
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER
> AND
> > > MODERATORS 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
> > > OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW,
> THE
> > > PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" 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
> "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Paul,

>Elements does not include curves adjustments, unfortunately.  

Oh, too bad.  Does Picture Window allow adjustment curves?



>>in the long run that using adj curves saves much time, ink and 
>>paper, and I finally stopped using TF curves altogether.
 
>I agree if it's for image adjustment...

Not sure what you mean here but just for clarification, I do not
flatten these curves permanently into the image.  I keep them strictly
as adjustments for output and the master image isn't altered.  So
conceptually they are used like TF curves.  I can tweak them for
variations in paper batches.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Paul,

The data section of the test file is in nine colums as follows:  Data 
number (1-51 in my case, 1-21 in yours); Sample name (A1, A2, A3, B1, 
B2, B3, C1, etc.); percentage of gray (e.g. 80.00); XYZ_X (e.g. 
4.65); XYZ_Y (e.g. 4.77); XYZ_Z (e.g. 3.54); LAB_L (26.08); LAB_A 
(e.g. 0.58); LAB_B (e.g. 2.52).  

Roy or Steve would know better, but I doubt Create ICC is reading the 
first column and probably not the second.  As Steve also suggested, 
the LAB_A and LAB_B columns could also be filled with zeros if you do 
not want to soft proof the actual paper color.  As the column 
headings are misalighed in my text file, I don't think Create ICC is 
looking for these headings, but rather columnar data that makes 
sense, left to right.  So, don't worry about the headings.  I suspect 
that columns 3-9 (or maybe 4-9) are the ones to have "in form."

I have found that the profiles from ICC create in a PS workflow are 
incredibly useful and I would encourage you to at least take a 
serious look at this.  I have finally found a reliable, consistent 
workflow to print through the Epson ABW driver.  This should be the 
same for any other form of output, driver, etc.

Best,
Walt


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> Walt,
> 
> Thanks for the information, that clarifies it somewhat. 
> 
> I have an X-Rite where I'll have to create the text file manually.  
What
> format is used?  I see what appear to be some sample files in the 
i1 folder,
> but it's not really clear how I'd plug in the L values for the 21 
steps.
> Since I only have the 2.3.1, I may have to just wait until that 
version is
> fixed.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
Of wwodets
> > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 7:04 PM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > To try and clarify:  The Create ICC.exe is a "droplet" program.  
You
> > take the text file with the data and drag and drop it onto the
> > program (and not a shortcut to the program). Create ICC will then
> > create the ICC profile in the same folder as the text file.  When 
you
> > do this, a window will open momentarily while the program is 
creating
> > the ICC profile,  but the program does not "run."  I keep a copy 
of
> > the program on my desktop (not a shortcut to the program) and then
> > drag and drop the text file on it.  I then have the ICC profiles 
on
> > the desktop and move them to the color folder.
> > 
> > There is a text file in the Eye One folder of the QTR folder and 
it
> > explains the use of the program.  Although Steve has described
> > something different, I had problems with the output (to the 
printer)
> > with Create ICC 2.3.1, so I have returned to the version in QTR
> > 2.3.0.  In a post on the QTR forum, Roy actually suggested using 
the
> > 2.3.0 for output until he corrected the problems in 2.3.1.
> > 
> > Best,
> > Walt
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Carl,
> > >
> > > Are you using Windows XP?  I think one problem I'm having is 
that
> > the Create
> > > ICC program doesn't seem to want to run at all.  I assume this 
is a
> > > different program than the Create Curve program -- or am I 
totally
> > confused?
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf
> > Of Carl
> > > > Schofield
> > > > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:02 PM
> > > > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson 
driver
> > > >
> > > > Paul,
> > > >
> > > > A simple text file with a column of Lab L values or density 
values
> > > > measured from a 21 step wedge is probably all you need (use a
> > column
> > > > heading of D for density values or L for Lab L values).  Just 
drag
> > > > and drop the text file onto the Create-icc script and it 
should
> > > > create both the icc profile and a text file with a plot of the
> > data.
> > > >
> > > > Carl
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Steve,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits 
(0,0)?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Yes.  ...
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I
> > > > > understand it.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in 
xyY?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
> > > > >> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
> > > > >> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer
> > possibly
> > > > >> can.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > This is what I'd want.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take
> > interface?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Now it is.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
> > > > > "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does 
it
> > > > > require i1?
> > > > > (It's in the i1 folder.)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm 
targeting
> > now
> > > > > it's
> > > > > complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W 
printing.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
> > > > >> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the
> > custom
> > > > > dot gain
> > > > > curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > >>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in 
which a
> > > > >>> Windows XP user
> > > > >>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print 
with
> > > > >>> Preview
> > > > >>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge 
with
> > the
> > > > >> workflow
> > > > >> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of
> > > > >> settings.  Scan
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will 
provide the
> > > > >> sort of
> > > > >> data
> > > > >> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get 
a
> > > > > momentary
> > > > > flash on the monitor.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
> > > > >>> with the Epson driver?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson 
Adv
> > B&W
> > > > >> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and 
cool.  I
> > do
> > > > >> not mess
> > > > >> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I 
prefer
> > to
> > > > >> edit the
> > > > >> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited 
editing
> > > > >> ability.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > The possible advantage with using the driver controls as 
much as
> > > > > possible is
> > > > > that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the
> > driver --
> > > > > with no
> > > > > loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with
> > Preview
> > > > > -- or
> > > > > anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each
> > transformation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to 
make
> > the
> > > > > ICCs at
> > > > > this point.
> > > > >
> > > > > Paul
> > > > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 
OWNER
> > AND
> > > > MODERATORS 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
> > > > OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL 
BW,
> > THE
> > > > PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" 
AND
> > "MODERATORS" 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
> > "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, 
THE

> > PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>

Clayton,

> 
> >Elements does not include curves adjustments, unfortunately.
> 
> Oh, too bad.  Does Picture Window allow adjustment curves?

Yes, it's been the cheap alternative I've recommended.  I'm not sure how
many people use it, however.  Elements, being Adobe, has a much higher
profile.  


> 
> ... I do not
> flatten these curves permanently into the image.  I keep them strictly
> as adjustments for output and the master image isn't altered.  So
> conceptually they are used like TF curves.  I can tweak them for
> variations in paper batches.

I know a lot of people keep the curves on a layer, but I've also seen people
forget to de-activate them while editing or forget to activate them for
printing.  The TF area for loading the curves avoids these problems.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Walt,

> 
> The data section of the test file is in nine colums as follows:  Data
> number (1-51 in my case, 1-21 in yours); Sample name (A1, A2, A3, B1,
> B2, B3, C1, etc.);

Do these sample names have any relevance, or are they arbitrary?

> percentage of gray (e.g. 80.00); XYZ_X (e.g.
> 4.65); XYZ_Y (e.g. 4.77); XYZ_Z (e.g. 3.54); LAB_L (26.08); LAB_A
> (e.g. 0.58); LAB_B (e.g. 2.52).
> 
> Roy or Steve would know better, but I doubt Create ICC is reading the
> first column and probably not the second.  As Steve also suggested,
> the LAB_A and LAB_B columns could also be filled with zeros if you do
> not want to soft proof the actual paper color.

If the Lab a and b can be zeros, what about the XYZ data?  That data seems
redundant of the Lab values.

> I have found that the profiles from ICC create in a PS workflow are
> incredibly useful ...

Yes, they seem like they would be.  That's why I'm exploring that approach.

>   I have finally found a reliable, consistent
> workflow to print through the Epson ABW driver.  This should be the
> same for any other form of output, driver, etc.

I agree.  I happen to like the Epson driver, but I also like the ability to
tweak fine tune the ramp.  So, the Print with Preview, with an ICC or TF as
an alternative, seems like a good way to go.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul Roark wrote:
> Clayton,
> 
> 
>>>Elements does not include curves adjustments, unfortunately.
>>
>>Oh, too bad.  Does Picture Window allow adjustment curves?
> 
> 
> Yes, it's been the cheap alternative I've recommended.  I'm not sure how
> many people use it, however.  Elements, being Adobe, has a much higher
> profile.  

With the first QTR ICC profiles I got some weird numbers with 
PWP for the conversions to paper profiles.  Qimage and 
Photoshop behaved much alike.  Most likely another BPC 
approach but it could be the rendering as well. This reply 
isn't about using the curves but be warned that profiles 
usable in PS may deliver other results in PWP.

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>

> 
> OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I understand it.
> 

The ICC spec actually misses out black point compensation/scaling. It is
fully geared for white point compensation but not the black end.  This is
why Adobe has BPC to manage the black end.  So BPC is only managing the
black end of the scale (not the white point scaling).
> 
>> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
> 
> I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?

No.  It is luminance. Pg 10 s6.3.2 of the spec describes the scaling for
media relativity.
 
> 
>> ...
>> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
>> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
>> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer possibly can.
> 
> This is what I'd want.

Yes and no.  A problem with an ICC profile which shows a perfect black point
(such as when embedded BPC scaling has been done) is that when you go to
soft proof PS says your printer can produce perfect black and hence your
deepest blacks are shown as monitor black even when you check Simulate Ink
Black.


> 
>> ...
> 
>>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take interface?
>> 
>> Now it is. 
> 
> 
> I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
> "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it require i1?
> (It's in the i1 folder.)

It's a droplet.  Drag your data file over the app icon and simply let it go.
A Windows user can describe this more accurately if I am wrong for Windows.
All this stuff is in the i1 folder because originally Carl found a way to
use MeasureTool (part of GM's PM5) to strip read step wedges for
linearization.


> 
> 
> 
>> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
> 
> Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting now it's
> complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.

Not really.  This is a powerful advantage of ICC profiles.  You get to see
what warm looks like etc.
> 
>> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
>> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
> 
> That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the custom dot gain
> curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.

I'll address this in another post.


> 
> 
> ...
>>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a
>>> Windows XP user
>>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with Preview
>>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
>>> 
>> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with the workflow
>> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of settings.  Scan
>> the
>> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the sort of
>> data
>> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
> 
> I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a momentary
> flash on the monitor.

Described above - don't run the app just drag your data file on top of it.
The data file is a simple text file.  I thought Roy, at the time of his new
QTR version announcement, described its basic format.  I can send you an
example of the output from MeasureTool but I believe Roy has made the
program capable of reading a more general data format.


> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
>>> with the Epson driver?
>> 
> 
>>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv B&W
>> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I do not mess
>> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer to edit the
>> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing ability.
> 
> The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as possible is
> that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the driver -- with no
> loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with Preview -- or
> anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each transformation.
> 
> Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make the ICCs at
> this point.


Once you get the drag and drop thing then all you need is a text file in the
right format.

I am surprised you are having issues with v2.3.1 but as I am on a Mac I
can't really be definitive.  My understanding is that v2.3.0 does not have
the colour info for soft proofing and that the only problem with it is the
very minor colour glitch - soft proofing only - that I described.  At any
rate the app is very small and perhaps Walt can email you the old version if
it helps.

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 03:03:39 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> To try and clarify:  The Create ICC.exe is a "droplet" program.  You
> take the text file with the data and drag and drop it onto the
> program (and not a shortcut to the program). Create ICC will then
> create the ICC profile in the same folder as the text file.  When you
> do this, a window will open momentarily while the program is creating
> the ICC profile,  but the program does not "run."  I keep a copy of
> the program on my desktop (not a shortcut to the program) and then
> drag and drop the text file on it.  I then have the ICC profiles on
> the desktop and move them to the color folder.
> 
> There is a text file in the Eye One folder of the QTR folder and it
> explains the use of the program.  Although Steve has described
> something different, I had problems with the output (to the printer)
> with Create ICC 2.3.1, so I have returned to the version in QTR
> 2.3.0.  In a post on the QTR forum, Roy actually suggested using the
> 2.3.0 for output until he corrected the problems in 2.3.1.
> 
> Best,
> Walt

Keep working with 2.3.1 if that's all you have.  It should be fine.  Get the
background understanding down.

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:56:19 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Walt,
> 
> Thanks for the information, that clarifies it somewhat.
> 
> I have an X-Rite where I'll have to create the text file manually.  What
> format is used?  I see what appear to be some sample files in the i1 folder,
> but it's not really clear how I'd plug in the L values for the 21 steps.
> Since I only have the 2.3.1, I may have to just wait until that version is
> fixed.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

From Roy's post announcing the new version that I mentioned in an earlier
post (formatting distorted in post):

Supports a more general data input file. Anything
columnar,
looks for column headings of:

GRAY
L, LAB, LAB_L, A, LAB_A, B, LAB_B
D, DENSITY, V, VISUAL

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:26:41 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> The data section of the test file is in nine colums as follows:  Data
> number (1-51 in my case, 1-21 in yours); Sample name (A1, A2, A3, B1,
> B2, B3, C1, etc.); percentage of gray (e.g. 80.00); XYZ_X (e.g.
> 4.65); XYZ_Y (e.g. 4.77); XYZ_Z (e.g. 3.54); LAB_L (26.08); LAB_A
> (e.g. 0.58); LAB_B (e.g. 2.52).
> 
> Roy or Steve would know better, but I doubt Create ICC is reading the
> first column and probably not the second.  As Steve also suggested,
> the LAB_A and LAB_B columns could also be filled with zeros if you do
> not want to soft proof the actual paper color.  As the column
> headings are misalighed in my text file, I don't think Create ICC is
> looking for these headings, but rather columnar data that makes
> sense, left to right.  So, don't worry about the headings.  I suspect
> that columns 3-9 (or maybe 4-9) are the ones to have "in form."
> 
> I have found that the profiles from ICC create in a PS workflow are
> incredibly useful and I would encourage you to at least take a
> serious look at this.  I have finally found a reliable, consistent
> workflow to print through the Epson ABW driver.  This should be the
> same for any other form of output, driver, etc.
> 
> Best,
> Walt

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:34:26 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Walt,
> 
>> 
>> The data section of the test file is in nine colums as follows:  Data
>> number (1-51 in my case, 1-21 in yours); Sample name (A1, A2, A3, B1,
>> B2, B3, C1, etc.);
> 
> Do these sample names have any relevance, or are they arbitrary?

Not important but once you see the MeasureTool output you will understand
what Walt is talking about.


> 
>> percentage of gray (e.g. 80.00); XYZ_X (e.g.
>> 4.65); XYZ_Y (e.g. 4.77); XYZ_Z (e.g. 3.54); LAB_L (26.08); LAB_A
>> (e.g. 0.58); LAB_B (e.g. 2.52).
>> 
>> Roy or Steve would know better, but I doubt Create ICC is reading the
>> first column and probably not the second.  As Steve also suggested,
>> the LAB_A and LAB_B columns could also be filled with zeros if you do
>> not want to soft proof the actual paper color.
> 
> If the Lab a and b can be zeros, what about the XYZ data?  That data seems
> redundant of the Lab values.

XYZ is not needed.  See earlier post.

> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>

Paul et al

I thought it might be useful to talk about some of the pluses and minuses
(in relation to this discussion) of transfer curves vs custom dot gain ICC
profiles vs PS curves vs QTR Create ICC profiles.  When Roy first delved
into this following a long discussion we had where I was saying that
linearising to L* was not enough I immediately saw the potential of the
approach. Having made two "generic" ICC profiles, Roy then put it off to one
side for a while.  I wanted to take it further and be able to create ICC
profiles from actual rather than hypothetical data (as the generics did).  I
don't have Roy's programming skills so I was looking for another method of
creating them.  I had a bunch of conversations with Phil Green - yes the
"ask Phil" guy you see on www.color.org.  He kept saying "I don't see why
you don't just use a PS curve to put the right transform in place".  Bruce
Fraser alerted me to the fact that PS can generate an ICC profile from a
custom dot gain.  So I've been around the various options here but only as
my understanding of the topic was growing. Thankfully Roy became interested
in the subject again and really produced a great product.

"Custom Dot Gain ICC Profile Generation"

A very cool part of PS is that it can create a simple greyscale ICC profile
from Custom Dot Gain information.  This profile can (and is intended to)
then be used for printing.

I struggled with this initially because I thought I needed to be able to
move the end points in order to reflect paper white and ink black.  Later I
understood that the inputs into an ICC profile are media relative and so I
didn't need to be able to move the white point.  But you do still need to
get the white point info into the profile.  The inability to move the black
point (bottom left) is a problem. In order to do a soft proof of ink black
properly you can't give PS a profile that indicates that the printer can
achieve perfect black.  Checking Simulate Ink Black will merely leave the
deep blacks at monitor black and you miss one of the key points of soft
proofing B&W.  So that's a big negative for using the Custom Dot Gain
approach.

Of course the other issue is you still need to know the stimulus-response
behaviour of the printer (ie to be able to measure the luminance of your
step wedge) and then do the scaling calculations for media relativity
(adjusting for white point) and also BPC (because the inability to shift the
black point forces you to "embed" BPC).

The last issue is of course the limited number of observations that a Custom
Dot Gain can accommodate.

"PS Curves"

PS Curves are useful in two ways.  You can create a curve to use as a soft
proof of the printer behaviour (eg reduced black and dull white).  You can
also create a curve to modify the luminance of the file data so that it is
scaled for paper white (media relativity) and ink black (BPC).  But the two
curves are very different and you don't want the soft proof curve to still
be there when you send the file to print.  Also you don't want the scaling
curve to be left in the file because it is only relevant for a particular
media/printer setup. It's all a bit messy. Furthermore, you still need to be
able to do all the measuring and scaling calculations to get the curve(s)
right.  So the complexity of the task has not changed except for the fact
that once you have the calculations done you do have a mechanism for putting
them into effect - better than nothing.

"Transfer Curves"

A transfer curve is simply the second of the two curves I mentioned above.
It has the one great advantage of not being embedded in the file.  It is a
print only curve.  But you can't soft proof with a transfer curve.  In order
to soft proof even just luminance, you need to create a soft proof curve as
mentioned above.  So net-net Transfer Curves don't get you much further than
PS curves.

"ICC Profiles"

The cool thing about ICC output profiles is that they don't need to
"embedded" in the file by a conversion (ie a change of data info).  They can
be invoked only at printing (an on-the-fly conversion) and soft proofing.
Done properly they can provide a soft proof for ink black (ie no embedded
BPC).  [I looked at Colorshop X's Greyscalebuilder utility but it is clumsy
and can't be used to automate the input of actual data.  (It did, however,
greatly help in my understanding of media relativity - at first I couldn't
understand why when I changed the media white point the curve did fall from
the top right corner!)]

I thought the programming of an ICC builder that read actual
stimulus-response behaviour into a kTRC (grey tonal response curve) to be
daunting enough.  But having got this under control Roy quickly turned his
attention to the alternative method of using A2B0/B2A0 lookup tables.  When
Roy mentioned to me that he was getting to grips with how these tables
worked I said that would be awesome because he could record colour
information for the soft proof direction and still leave the printer
direction managing luminance only.  What we have now is a first draft of
exactly that and is an awesome achievement.

(One has to remember that it is very difficult to ask colour engineers
questions about this stuff.  They think and breathe colour and getting them
to help in the constrained B&W world can be difficult.  There is also a lot
of info at the ICC site but it's a lot of "this is" and not a lot of
"because of this" - ie a lot of factual stuff but little "why".  Roy has
done a tremendous job filtering through all this stuff for our benefit.)

Linearising vs Profiling

In theory a more linear printer means profiling is easier.  This is because
it is impractical for the profile to have every possible observation in it
(although it is much more practical for greyscale than colour) and so it
needs to interpolate between observations.  Linearity makes interpolation
easy.  But get enough observations in the sample and linearity becomes, I
think, less important.  I suspect, although I am not knowledgeable enough on
this stuff to be definitive, that for B&W so long as the printer has a
semblance of linearity then 51 observations is more than enough for sensible
output and linearising the printer becomes less relevant.  (I think the
whole Epson Colorbase trip we all went on a couple of weeks back was a wild
goose chase.)  My bet is that 51 observations would be enough to manage even
the crude Black Only luminance scale for example.  Only testing will tell.
Remember 51 observations (even 21) is a huge number of observations for a
single axis - imagine doing that number for each combination of 3 axes R, G
and B.

Now to practicalities.

One can pay the QTR shareware fee and use QTR Create ICC even if you don't
have an expensive spectrophotometer.  You can simply plug the hue data
(Lab's a* and b*) with zeros.  You will need a densitometer that either
outputs L* or XYZ_Y and then you can convert that to L* - ie you need to be
able to measure luminance.  But in the grand scheme of things these are
relatively cheap.  You will not be able to soft proof the hue of your output
but I think this is a secondary concern.  What I like about the QTR Create
ICC profiles the most is that my print workflow is now really very
automated.  I know that the profile will scale the image luminance properly
for my print media and simply need to focus on getting the image looking
right on screen.  The first soft proof really is the print "at size".

Even if one has to spot read the 21 or 51 patches this isn't so bad.
Getting the data into the right format is easy once you understand what
formats are allowed.  A simple text editor can do this.

Of course if you do have a spectrophotometer - and it doesn't have to be an
EyeOne - then you can include the a* and b* information and get a soft proof
of hue as well as luminance.

I hope this helps.

Steve

Steve Kale wrote,
>
> From Roy's post announcing the new version that I mentioned 
> in an earlier post (formatting distorted in post):
> 
> Supports a more general data input file. Anything
> columnar,
> looks for column headings of:
> 
> GRAY
> L, LAB, LAB_L, A, LAB_A, B, LAB_B
> D, DENSITY, V, VISUAL
> 
> 
The X-rite 810 produces two types of data - density readings (called "Vis")
and "RGB" readings for colour information. I understand how to use the
Density readings in the text file for Create-ICC but I'm not sure how to
convert the RGB readings (which are on the same density scale as the Vis
readings) to Lab_A & Lab_B. Is this possible?

Thanks
Howard

Hmm.  RGB is not a colour space per se.  A set of RGB numbers don't mean
anything without a colour space attached eg Adobe RGB.  I think (getting out
of my depth here as I am not familiar with the X-rite) you need to find the
context in which those numbers sit.

> From: Howard Shaw <glassman@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 11:54:36 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve Kale wrote,
>> 
>> From Roy's post announcing the new version that I mentioned
>> in an earlier post (formatting distorted in post):
>> 
>> Supports a more general data input file. Anything
>> columnar,
>> looks for column headings of:
>> 
>> GRAY
>> L, LAB, LAB_L, A, LAB_A, B, LAB_B
>> D, DENSITY, V, VISUAL
>> 
>> 
> The X-rite 810 produces two types of data - density readings (called "Vis")
> and "RGB" readings for colour information. I understand how to use the
> Density readings in the text file for Create-ICC but I'm not sure how to
> convert the RGB readings (which are on the same density scale as the Vis
> readings) to Lab_A & Lab_B. Is this possible?
> 
> Thanks
> Howard

Once you have that then check out Bruce Lindbloom's site here:

http://www.brucelindbloom.com/

Under CIE Color Calculator.  Notice how you need to select the colour model
for RGB calculations to be correct.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:07:05 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Hmm.  RGB is not a colour space per se.  A set of RGB numbers don't mean
> anything without a colour space attached eg Adobe RGB.  I think (getting out
> of my depth here as I am not familiar with the X-rite) you need to find the
> context in which those numbers sit.
> 
>

Steve Kale wrote,
> 
> Hmm.  RGB is not a colour space per se.  A set of RGB numbers 
> don't mean anything without a colour space attached eg Adobe 
> RGB.  I think (getting out of my depth here as I am not 
> familiar with the X-rite) you need to find the context in 
> which those numbers sit.
> 

The "RGB" numbers are not like the 0-255 you would get in Photoshop but on
the sme scale as the density readings. For example a dmax Vis reading of
1.68 might read R1.70 G1.65 B1.63 if it was a warm black. 

I don't see a model in Bruce Lindbloom's list that would seem to be
appropriate.

Howard

I think these are just the various densities then - red channel, green
channel and blue channel then visual.  I do not know how to interpret this
colour information but I am sure someone else here does.

> From: Howard Shaw <glassman@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:25:52 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve Kale wrote,
>> 
>> Hmm.  RGB is not a colour space per se.  A set of RGB numbers
>> don't mean anything without a colour space attached eg Adobe
>> RGB.  I think (getting out of my depth here as I am not
>> familiar with the X-rite) you need to find the context in
>> which those numbers sit.
>> 
> 
> The "RGB" numbers are not like the 0-255 you would get in Photoshop but on
> the sme scale as the density readings. For example a dmax Vis reading of
> 1.68 might read R1.70 G1.65 B1.63 if it was a warm black.
> 
> I don't see a model in Bruce Lindbloom's list that would seem to be
> appropriate.
> 
> Howard

Paul,

You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column of  
either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L label)  
data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values for Lab  
a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L values  
can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high to  
low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version on a  
Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.

Carl

On Oct 17, 2005, at 11:56 PM, Paul Roark wrote:

> Walt,
>
> Thanks for the information, that clarifies it somewhat.
>
> I have an X-Rite where I'll have to create the text file manually.   
> What
> format is used?  I see what appear to be some sample files in the  
> i1 folder,
> but it's not really clear how I'd plug in the L values for the 21  
> steps.
> Since I only have the 2.3.1, I may have to just wait until that  
> version is
> fixed.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  
>> wwodets
>> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 7:04 PM
>> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> To try and clarify:  The Create ICC.exe is a "droplet" program.  You
>> take the text file with the data and drag and drop it onto the
>> program (and not a shortcut to the program). Create ICC will then
>> create the ICC profile in the same folder as the text file.  When you
>> do this, a window will open momentarily while the program is creating
>> the ICC profile,  but the program does not "run."  I keep a copy of
>> the program on my desktop (not a shortcut to the program) and then
>> drag and drop the text file on it.  I then have the ICC profiles on
>> the desktop and move them to the color folder.
>>
>> There is a text file in the Eye One folder of the QTR folder and it
>> explains the use of the program.  Although Steve has described
>> something different, I had problems with the output (to the printer)
>> with Create ICC 2.3.1, so I have returned to the version in QTR
>> 2.3.0.  In a post on the QTR forum, Roy actually suggested using the
>> 2.3.0 for output until he corrected the problems in 2.3.1.
>>
>> Best,
>> Walt
>>
>>
>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
>> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Carl,
>>>
>>> Are you using Windows XP?  I think one problem I'm having is that
>>>
>> the Create
>>
>>> ICC program doesn't seem to want to run at all.  I assume this is a
>>> different program than the Create Curve program -- or am I totally
>>>
>> confused?
>>
>>>
>>> Paul
>>> www.PaulRoark.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>>>> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
>>>>
>> Of Carl
>>
>>>> Schofield
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:02 PM
>>>> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>>>
>>>> Paul,
>>>>
>>>> A simple text file with a column of Lab L values or density values
>>>> measured from a 21 step wedge is probably all you need (use a
>>>>
>> column
>>
>>>> heading of D for density values or L for Lab L values).  Just drag
>>>> and drop the text file onto the Create-icc script and it should
>>>> create both the icc profile and a text file with a plot of the
>>>>
>> data.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Carl
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 17, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Steve,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, does black point compensation mean the curve hits (0,0)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.  ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, BPC is used to take care of the end point issues, as I
>>>>> understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ... in XYZ (for B&W we only care about Y)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought Y in CIE XYZ was green.  Or do you mean the Y in xyY?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> BPC scales the data such that the curve begins at 0,0.
>>>>>> So when you send pixel value 0 to the printer
>>>>>> it gets left at 0 and hence prints as dark as the printer
>>>>>>
>> possibly
>>
>>>>>> can.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is what I'd want.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is the QTR Curve Creator Linearization tab a look-up take
>>>>>>>
>> interface?
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now it is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I'm only able to open the Curves Creator and not the
>>>>> "QTR-Create-ICC.exe."  Is this just a Mac program, or does it
>>>>> require i1?
>>>>> (It's in the i1 folder.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ... [Roy's] aim is to proof hue and luminance correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ultimately, that could be useful, but for the B&W I'm targeting
>>>>>
>> now
>>
>>>>> it's
>>>>> complexity that gets in the way of the basics of B&W printing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ...  ICC profiles have the advantage
>>>>>> that people can set up soft proof in the normal fashion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That sounds like another complex story.  If we're in PS the
>>>>>
>> custom
>>
>>>>> dot gain
>>>>> curves do it, but we do need to get a simpler method.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a place that describes the specific ways in which a
>>>>>>> Windows XP user
>>>>>>> can use QTR to make an ICC that can be used in the Print with
>>>>>>> Preview
>>>>>>> workflow and then the Epson driver?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not sure but it is really very easy.  Print a step wedge with
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> workflow
>>>>>> of your choice eg Epson Adv B&W with a particular set of
>>>>>> settings.  Scan
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> step wedge with an EyeOne or other device that will provide the
>>>>>> sort of
>>>>>> data
>>>>>> QTR Create ICC can read. ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure I can even open Create ICC.  So far I just get a
>>>>> momentary
>>>>> flash on the monitor.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are those ICCs useable in the Print with Preview procedure
>>>>>>> with the Epson driver?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>   Yes I use them all the time.  I have profiled my Epson Adv
>>>>>>
>> B&W
>>
>>>>>> settings, one for each hue - neutral, warm, sepia and cool.  I
>>>>>>
>> do
>>
>>>>>> not mess
>>>>>> with the darker and other settings (other than hue).  I prefer
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> edit the
>>>>>> image in PS rather than in the driver which has limited editing
>>>>>> ability.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The possible advantage with using the driver controls as much as
>>>>> possible is
>>>>> that they may well be doing hardware linearization in the
>>>>>
>> driver --
>>
>>>>> with no
>>>>> loss of grayscale steps.  The ICC or TF in the Print with
>>>>>
>> Preview
>>
>>>>> -- or
>>>>> anywhere in PS -- loses some information with each
>>>>>
>> transformation.
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting stuff, but I don't seem to have an easy way to make
>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>> ICCs at
>>>>> this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>> www.PaulRoark.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>

Thanks for clarifying Carl.  That should make it easy for anyone with a
densitometer or Spectrophotometer to use the app.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:45:08 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column of
> either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L label)
> data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values for Lab
> a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L values
> can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high to
> low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version on a
> Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.
> 
> Carl
>

Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the Gray value
else it does not know for what input the output was generated.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:45:08 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column of
> either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L label)
> data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values for Lab
> a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L values
> can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high to
> low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version on a
> Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.
> 
> Carl

Steve,

Yes, I tried it and it works well.  It assumes you have values from 0  
to 100 and just scales accordingly (after sorting).  There is a  
potential for error if your D values (or inversely L values) to not  
increase with increasing gray values, but that would be abnormal.

Carl

On Oct 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Steve Kale wrote:

> Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the  
> Gray value
> else it does not know for what input the output was generated.
>
>
>
>> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...m>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:45:08 -0400
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column of
>> either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L label)
>> data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values for Lab
>> a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L values
>> can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high to
>> low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version on a
>> Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -------------------- 
> ~-->
> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your  
> home page
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ucIolB/TM
> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ~->
>
> 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 „Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines‰  
> 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  
> „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ 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  „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ 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 DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

OK I think there may be issues with how one creates or saves the text file
for input to QTR Create ICC.  I just took a Measuretool output file that
works with QTR Create ICC into Excel and then saved it as a tab delimited
text file again (no edits) and the saved version doesn't work with QTR
Create ICC.  Someone smarter than me can figure this out for those that need
to manually get an input file together.

You are doing 100 (+1) steps?  I guess QTR Create ICC can simply assume the
steps are evenly spaced...If so anyone using less than 100 would need to
make sure their steps are.  Personally I think this is a risk and if this is
one way Roy is making the data input file more flexible I would ask him to
reverse it. One might want to do say 60 steps and have more data points at
the dark end.  Having the input co-ordinate and not assuming it makes sense
to me.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:22:53 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve,
> 
> Yes, I tried it and it works well.  It assumes you have values from 0
> to 100 and just scales accordingly (after sorting).  There is a
> potential for error if your D values (or inversely L values) to not
> increase with increasing gray values, but that would be abnormal.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Steve Kale wrote:
> 
>> Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the
>> Gray value
>> else it does not know for what input the output was generated.

Steve,

The number of steps doesn't matter.  I've tried it with 21, 26, and  
51 steps with no problems.  Increments of 1, 2, 4, and 5 work fine.   
I opened both measuretool and QuickRead files into appleworks  
(spreadsheet), copied just the L data column, and pasted the values  
into a new spreadsheet and then saved as an ASCII text file.  Worked  
fine.  I initially had some problems getting create-icc to work with  
raw QuickRead output text files, but the text files were incorrectly  
formatted when saved using the Mac save option (needed to use the PC  
format to get it to work).  Has something to do with eol returns that  
Roy can explain better than I could.  This may be the same problem  
you are experiencing with your text files.

Carl

On Oct 18, 2005, at 10:39 AM, Steve Kale wrote:

> OK I think there may be issues with how one creates or saves the  
> text file
> for input to QTR Create ICC.  I just took a Measuretool output file  
> that
> works with QTR Create ICC into Excel and then saved it as a tab  
> delimited
> text file again (no edits) and the saved version doesn't work with QTR
> Create ICC.  Someone smarter than me can figure this out for those  
> that need
> to manually get an input file together.
>
> You are doing 100 (+1) steps?  I guess QTR Create ICC can simply  
> assume the
> steps are evenly spaced...If so anyone using less than 100 would  
> need to
> make sure their steps are.  Personally I think this is a risk and  
> if this is
> one way Roy is making the data input file more flexible I would ask  
> him to
> reverse it. One might want to do say 60 steps and have more data  
> points at
> the dark end.  Having the input co-ordinate and not assuming it  
> makes sense
> to me.
>
>
>
>> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:22:53 -0400
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> Yes, I tried it and it works well.  It assumes you have values from 0
>> to 100 and just scales accordingly (after sorting).  There is a
>> potential for error if your D values (or inversely L values) to not
>> increase with increasing gray values, but that would be abnormal.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Steve Kale wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the
>>> Gray value
>>> else it does not know for what input the output was generated.
>>>
>

Steve,

With 2.3.1 the white end was significantly off *on the print.*  The 
Soft Proof looked good.  In his last post on the QTR forum, Roy said:

"There are a couple subtle problems with the color version of Create 
ICC.  They have to do with scaling/mapping at the media-white end.  
These will take a little time to fix . . . The older version from 
2.3.0 can be used for the printing direction."

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> I am surprised you are having issues with v2.3.1 but as I am on a 
Mac I
> can't really be definitive.  My understanding is that v2.3.0 does 
not have
> the colour info for soft proofing and that the only problem with it 
is the
> very minor colour glitch - soft proofing only - that I described.  
At any
> rate the app is very small and perhaps Walt can email you the old 
version if
> it helps.
> 
> 
> > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 03:03:39 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > To try and clarify:  The Create ICC.exe is a "droplet" program.  
You
> > take the text file with the data and drag and drop it onto the
> > program (and not a shortcut to the program). Create ICC will then
> > create the ICC profile in the same folder as the text file.  When 
you
> > do this, a window will open momentarily while the program is 
creating
> > the ICC profile,  but the program does not "run."  I keep a copy 
of
> > the program on my desktop (not a shortcut to the program) and then
> > drag and drop the text file on it.  I then have the ICC profiles 
on
> > the desktop and move them to the color folder.
> > 
> > There is a text file in the Eye One folder of the QTR folder and 
it
> > explains the use of the program.  Although Steve has described
> > something different, I had problems with the output (to the 
printer)
> > with Create ICC 2.3.1, so I have returned to the version in QTR
> > 2.3.0.  In a post on the QTR forum, Roy actually suggested using 
the

> > 2.3.0 for output until he corrected the problems in 2.3.1.
> > 
> > Best,
> > Walt
>

Yes this is the issue I described earlier..  But this should not interrupt
the working of the app itself - ie getting an ICC profile.  2.3.1 should
work fine for luminance management of the printer.

(Again where 2.3.1 is slightly wrong is in the soft proof direction.
Remember I talked about media relative colorimetry.  Roy, in making the soft
proof direction of the profile media relative, only scaled the luminance
axis and not all three axes.  So the hue is slightly off - you can see this
in looking at areas that should be white.  Load the soft proof and flick it
on and off with Simulate Paper White UNCHECKED.  There should be no hue
shift for a white page but there is.  It's a relatively simple fix and I am
sure Roy will get to it when he can.  Think about this:  if you print a step
wedge on pink paper and create an ICC profile from it, what colour should a
white image be when the soft proof using the ICC profile has Simulate Paper
White unchecked?  It should be monitor white. )

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:04:43 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Steve: Problems with Create ICC 2.3.1
> 
> Steve,
> 
> With 2.3.1 the white end was significantly off *on the print.*  The
> Soft Proof looked good.  In his last post on the QTR forum, Roy said:
> 
> "There are a couple subtle problems with the color version of Create
> ICC.  They have to do with scaling/mapping at the media-white end.
> These will take a little time to fix . . . The older version from
> 2.3.0 can be used for the printing direction."
> 
>

Carl and Steve: 

This is exactly the problem I mentioned in an earlier post about 
profiling the Arches Smooth paper.  The Lab values were linear up to 
a 90% gray.  After that (for the 92, 94, 96, 98 and 100% gray) LAB 
values read: 19.39, 19.06, 18.70, 18.95, 19.39.  Rather than 
correcting this nonlinearity, Create ICC produced an unusable profile 
with a full scale, retangular spike between LAB 0 and LAB 8 (e.g. LAB 
5 was "corrected" to LAB 98).  So this supports Carl's description of 
function (and, I think, reduces the utility of the program).

The abnormailty in this case was produced, I think, by the way the 
ink sits on the Arches coating: way too wet.

Walt

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield 
<scho@m...> wrote:
>
> Steve,
> 
> Yes, I tried it and it works well.  It assumes you have values from 
0  
> to 100 and just scales accordingly (after sorting).  There is a  
> potential for error if your D values (or inversely L values) to 
not  
> increase with increasing gray values, but that would be abnormal.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Steve Kale wrote:
> 
> > Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the  
> > Gray value
> > else it does not know for what input the output was generated.
> >
> >
> >
> >> From: Carl Schofield <scho@m...>
> >> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:45:08 -0400
> >> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson 
driver
> >>
> >> Paul,
> >>
> >> You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column of
> >> either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L label)
> >> data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values for 
Lab
> >> a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L 
values
> >> can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high 
to
> >> low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version 
on a
> >> Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.
> >>
> >> Carl
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -------------------
- 
> > ~-->
> > Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your  
> > home page
> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ucIolB/TM
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
> > ~->
> >
> > 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 „Group Topic, Rules and 
Guidelines‰  
> > 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  
> > „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ 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  „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ 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 DIGITAL BW, THE  
> > PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

I have a stripped down text file with just Gray, Lab_L, Lab_A, and Lab_B
columns generating an ICC in Windows XP.  The Gray column has the 21 steps
0.00 through 100.00 listed.  The Lab_L has those entries put in manually
from my X-Rite, and the other Lab columns just have zeros entered.  The
columns are just separated with tabs.

Where does one get control of the final density targets?  In some files in
the i1 folder there is a last sentence that appears to have those targets.
When I enter a line like that, the Create ICC ceases to work.

Somewhere I assume we have the ability to define our final density ramp.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I've answered this in our off-list conversation.  Mail crossing in
cyberspace....

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:44:09 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I have a stripped down text file with just Gray, Lab_L, Lab_A, and Lab_B
> columns generating an ICC in Windows XP.  The Gray column has the 21 steps
> 0.00 through 100.00 listed.  The Lab_L has those entries put in manually
> from my X-Rite, and the other Lab columns just have zeros entered.  The
> columns are just separated with tabs.
> 
> Where does one get control of the final density targets?  In some files in
> the i1 folder there is a last sentence that appears to have those targets.
> When I enter a line like that, the Create ICC ceases to work.
> 
> Somewhere I assume we have the ability to define our final density ramp.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

This is a different issue.  You have your shadows compressed.  With QTR, the
Linearize function will take care of this for you. I am assuming you got
this result with Epson Adv B&W else you would correct it with Linearize
before doing the profile.  If I am right then the issue is as the Epson
driver puts more ink down in the shadows you don't get an increase in
density causing this blocking up.  Personally, given the best of these
numbers is not very good I would not use the paper.  If you really want to
use the paper then you need to find a way to reduce the ink load being put
down by the Epson driver.  Make sense?

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:43:45 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Carl and Steve:   ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson
> driver
> 
> Carl and Steve: 
> 
> This is exactly the problem I mentioned in an earlier post about
> profiling the Arches Smooth paper.  The Lab values were linear up to
> a 90% gray.  After that (for the 92, 94, 96, 98 and 100% gray) LAB
> values read: 19.39, 19.06, 18.70, 18.95, 19.39.  Rather than
> correcting this nonlinearity, Create ICC produced an unusable profile
> with a full scale, retangular spike between LAB 0 and LAB 8 (e.g. LAB
> 5 was "corrected" to LAB 98).  So this supports Carl's description of
> function (and, I think, reduces the utility of the program).
> 
> The abnormailty in this case was produced, I think, by the way the
> ink sits on the Arches coating: way too wet.
> 
> Walt

Walt,

I don't think the utility of the program is reduced.  Rather, the  
measurement data are faulty, for whatever reason, and should not be  
used in an attempt to generate an icc profile.  I think you should  
instead try to correct the printing problem (e.g. adjust ink limits,  
ink overlap, partitioning, etc.) that is producing the aberrant  
measurements.

Carl

On Oct 18, 2005, at 11:43 AM, wwodets wrote:

> Carl and Steve:
>
> This is exactly the problem I mentioned in an earlier post about
> profiling the Arches Smooth paper.  The Lab values were linear up to
> a 90% gray.  After that (for the 92, 94, 96, 98 and 100% gray) LAB
> values read: 19.39, 19.06, 18.70, 18.95, 19.39.  Rather than
> correcting this nonlinearity, Create ICC produced an unusable profile
> with a full scale, retangular spike between LAB 0 and LAB 8 (e.g. LAB
> 5 was "corrected" to LAB 98).  So this supports Carl's description of
> function (and, I think, reduces the utility of the program).
>
> The abnormailty in this case was produced, I think, by the way the
> ink sits on the Arches coating: way too wet.
>
> Walt
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield
> <scho@m...> wrote:
>
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> Yes, I tried it and it works well.  It assumes you have values from
>>
> 0
>
>> to 100 and just scales accordingly (after sorting).  There is a
>> potential for error if your D values (or inversely L values) to
>>
> not
>
>> increase with increasing gray values, but that would be abnormal.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Steve Kale wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the
>>> Gray value
>>> else it does not know for what input the output was generated.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: Carl Schofield <scho@m...>
>>>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:45:08 -0400
>>>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson
>>>>
> driver
>
>>>>
>>>> Paul,
>>>>
>>>> You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column of
>>>> either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L label)
>>>> data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values for
>>>>
> Lab
>
>>>> a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L
>>>>
> values
>
>>>> can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high
>>>>
> to
>
>>>> low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version
>>>>
> on a
>
>>>> Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.
>>>>
>>>> Carl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
Steve-

Yes, I agree.  The profiles were non-linearized and through the ABW 
driver and I was not able to reduce the ink flow usefully in the ink 
control of the ABW (the blacks got way too weak before anything got 
better).  The Arches looks like a problem paper to me, despite its 
virtues.  The equivalent 92, 94, 96, 98, 100 figures for Red River 
Dourian are:  17.61, 16.82, 16.63, 16.54 and 16.30.  On HPR they are: 
17.63, 17.14, 16.94, 16.69, 16.80; and on Velvet Fine Art they are: 
17.60, 16.41, 15.48, 14.47, 13.83).  

Walt  


>
> This is a different issue.  You have your shadows compressed.  With 
QTR, the
> Linearize function will take care of this for you. I am assuming 
you got
> this result with Epson Adv B&W else you would correct it with 
Linearize
> before doing the profile.  If I am right then the issue is as the 
Epson
> driver puts more ink down in the shadows you don't get an increase 
in
> density causing this blocking up.  Personally, given the best of 
these
> numbers is not very good I would not use the paper.  If you really 
want to
> use the paper then you need to find a way to reduce the ink load 
being put
> down by the Epson driver.  Make sense?
> 
> 
> > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:43:45 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Carl and Steve:   ICC v. Transfer Function 
in Epson
> > driver
> > 
> > Carl and Steve: 
> > 
> > This is exactly the problem I mentioned in an earlier post about
> > profiling the Arches Smooth paper.  The Lab values were linear up 
to
> > a 90% gray.  After that (for the 92, 94, 96, 98 and 100% gray) LAB
> > values read: 19.39, 19.06, 18.70, 18.95, 19.39.  Rather than
> > correcting this nonlinearity, Create ICC produced an unusable 
profile
> > with a full scale, retangular spike between LAB 0 and LAB 8 (e.g. 
LAB
> > 5 was "corrected" to LAB 98).  So this supports Carl's 
description of

> > function (and, I think, reduces the utility of the program).
> > 
> > The abnormailty in this case was produced, I think, by the way the
> > ink sits on the Arches coating: way too wet.
> > 
> > Walt
>

HPR  -  Much more like it!  If you want to stick with Arches use QTR to fix
that linearization problem.

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:13:33 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Carl and Steve:   ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson
> driver
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> Steve-
> 
> Yes, I agree.  The profiles were non-linearized and through the ABW
> driver and I was not able to reduce the ink flow usefully in the ink
> control of the ABW (the blacks got way too weak before anything got
> better).  The Arches looks like a problem paper to me, despite its
> virtues.  The equivalent 92, 94, 96, 98, 100 figures for Red River
> Dourian are:  17.61, 16.82, 16.63, 16.54 and 16.30.  On HPR they are:
> 17.63, 17.14, 16.94, 16.69, 16.80; and on Velvet Fine Art they are:
> 17.60, 16.41, 15.48, 14.47, 13.83).
> 
> Walt

Carl-
Agreed.  See my response to Steve above.  This is a problem with the 
ABW and this paper only.

Walt


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield 
<scho@m...> wrote:
>
> Walt,
> 
> I don't think the utility of the program is reduced.  Rather, the  
> measurement data are faulty, for whatever reason, and should not 
be  
> used in an attempt to generate an icc profile.  I think you should  
> instead try to correct the printing problem (e.g. adjust ink 
limits,  
> ink overlap, partitioning, etc.) that is producing the aberrant  
> measurements.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 11:43 AM, wwodets wrote:
> 
> > Carl and Steve:
> >
> > This is exactly the problem I mentioned in an earlier post about
> > profiling the Arches Smooth paper.  The Lab values were linear up 
to
> > a 90% gray.  After that (for the 92, 94, 96, 98 and 100% gray) LAB
> > values read: 19.39, 19.06, 18.70, 18.95, 19.39.  Rather than
> > correcting this nonlinearity, Create ICC produced an unusable 
profile
> > with a full scale, retangular spike between LAB 0 and LAB 8 (e.g. 
LAB
> > 5 was "corrected" to LAB 98).  So this supports Carl's 
description of
> > function (and, I think, reduces the utility of the program).
> >
> > The abnormailty in this case was produced, I think, by the way the
> > ink sits on the Arches coating: way too wet.
> >
> > Walt
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl 
Schofield
> > <scho@m...> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Steve,
> >>
> >> Yes, I tried it and it works well.  It assumes you have values 
from
> >>
> > 0
> >
> >> to 100 and just scales accordingly (after sorting).  There is a
> >> potential for error if your D values (or inversely L values) to
> >>
> > not
> >
> >> increase with increasing gray values, but that would be abnormal.
> >>
> >> Carl
> >>
> >> On Oct 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Steve Kale wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Actually Carl are you sure about this?  It should also need the
> >>> Gray value
> >>> else it does not know for what input the output was generated.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> From: Carl Schofield <scho@m...>
> >>>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:45:08 -0400
> >>>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson
> >>>>
> > driver
> >
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul,
> >>>>
> >>>> You don't need all of the data columns.  Just a single column 
of
> >>>> either visual density (labeled either D or V) or Lab L (L 
label)
> >>>> data.  The icc-create droplet will simply assume zero values 
for

> >>>>
> > Lab
> >
> >>>> a and Lab b if no actual data are present.  The density or L
> >>>>
> > values
> >
> >>>> can also be in any order and will be automatically sorted (high
> >>>>
> > to
> >
> >>>> low for L and low to high for D).  This with the 2.3.1 version
> >>>>
> > on a
> >
> >>>> Mac but I assume it is the same for the PC version.
> >>>>
> >>>> Carl
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
>

I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% - 100%
steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density distribution.

I was looking for an easy way to put the icc into the correct folder, but
have not found one yet.  If I open the icc with Notepad and save it,
Photoshop does not see it as an icc.

Is there a way to refresh the Photoshop icc list without closing and
re-opening the program?

Sorry for all the questions you guys have worked out long ago. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul
> Roark
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 7:44 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I have a stripped down text file with just Gray, Lab_L, Lab_A, and Lab_B
> columns generating an ICC in Windows XP.  The Gray column has the 21 steps
> 0.00 through 100.00 listed.  The Lab_L has those entries put in manually
> from my X-Rite, and the other Lab columns just have zeros entered.  The
> columns are just separated with tabs.
> 
> Where does one get control of the final density targets?  In some files in
> the i1 folder there is a last sentence that appears to have those targets.
> When I enter a line like that, the Create ICC ceases to work.
> 
> Somewhere I assume we have the ability to define our final density ramp.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
> MODERATORS 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
> OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:23:12 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
> system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% - 100%
> steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density distribution.

I think this is something you have to be careful of.  Remember the colour
management at work in showing the image on your display (no soft proof or
anything) is doing an identical thing.  Perfect black (image file) can't be
generated by your display.  Instead Adobe CMM is mapping the file black to
your monitor's black point, most likely with relative colormetric intent and
black point compensation (so there is no clipping).  So this is exactly the
same thing as what the printer ICC profile is doing only the printer black
is even worse.  So the point to remember is that you have been looking at
this sort of scaling all the time for years.

The scaling of luminance in XYZ makes sense.


> 
> I was looking for an easy way to put the icc into the correct folder, but
> have not found one yet.  If I open the icc with Notepad and save it,
> Photoshop does not see it as an icc.
> 
> Is there a way to refresh the Photoshop icc list without closing and
> re-opening the program?

Annoyingly, not that I know of.

> 
> Sorry for all the questions you guys have worked out long ago.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Shouldn't the rendering intent be set to perceptual in the Print with  
preview dialog when using the gray icc profile for printing?

On Oct 18, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

>
>
>
>
>> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:23:12 -0700
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>
>> I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
>> system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% -  
>> 100%
>> steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density  
>> distribution.
>>
>
> I think this is something you have to be careful of.  Remember the  
> colour
> management at work in showing the image on your display (no soft  
> proof or
> anything) is doing an identical thing.  Perfect black (image file)  
> can't be
> generated by your display.  Instead Adobe CMM is mapping the file  
> black to
> your monitor's black point, most likely with relative colormetric  
> intent and
> black point compensation (so there is no clipping).  So this is  
> exactly the
> same thing as what the printer ICC profile is doing only the  
> printer black
> is even worse.  So the point to remember is that you have been  
> looking at
> this sort of scaling all the time for years.
>
> The scaling of luminance in XYZ makes sense.
>
>
>
>>
>> I was looking for an easy way to put the icc into the correct  
>> folder, but
>> have not found one yet.  If I open the icc with Notepad and save it,
>> Photoshop does not see it as an icc.
>>
>> Is there a way to refresh the Photoshop icc list without closing and
>> re-opening the program?
>>
>
> Annoyingly, not that I know of.
>
>
>
>>
>> Sorry for all the questions you guys have worked out long ago.
>>
>> Paul
>> www.PaulRoark.com
>>

Yes.  But in greyscale there is actually, I believe, no difference between
relcol and perceptual. (You need to select perceptual in the driver so it
links to the A2B0/B2A0 tables.)

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 13:01:36 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Shouldn't the rendering intent be set to perceptual in the Print with
> preview dialog when using the gray icc profile for printing?
> 
> 
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Steve Kale wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
>>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:23:12 -0700
>>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>> 
>>> I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
>>> system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% -
>>> 100%
>>> steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density
>>> distribution.
>>> 
>> 
>> I think this is something you have to be careful of.  Remember the
>> colour
>> management at work in showing the image on your display (no soft
>> proof or
>> anything) is doing an identical thing.  Perfect black (image file)
>> can't be
>> generated by your display.  Instead Adobe CMM is mapping the file
>> black to
>> your monitor's black point, most likely with relative colormetric
>> intent and
>> black point compensation (so there is no clipping).  So this is
>> exactly the
>> same thing as what the printer ICC profile is doing only the
>> printer black
>> is even worse.  So the point to remember is that you have been
>> looking at
>> this sort of scaling all the time for years.
>> 
>> The scaling of luminance in XYZ makes sense.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I was looking for an easy way to put the icc into the correct
>>> folder, but
>>> have not found one yet.  If I open the icc with Notepad and save it,
>>> Photoshop does not see it as an icc.
>>> 
>>> Is there a way to refresh the Photoshop icc list without closing and
>>> re-opening the program?
>>> 
>> 
>> Annoyingly, not that I know of.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Sorry for all the questions you guys have worked out long ago.
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> www.PaulRoark.com
>

>Paul Roark wrote:
> > 
> > I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
> > system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% - 100%
> > steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density distribution.


Steve wrote:

> ...  Remember the colour
> management at work in showing the image on your display (no soft proof or
> anything) is doing an identical thing.  ...
> Adobe CMM is mapping the file black to your monitor's black point, 
> most likely with relative colormetric intent and
> black point compensation (so there is no clipping).  
> So this is exactly the
> same thing as what the printer ICC profile is doing 
> only the printer black is even worse.  
> So the point to remember is that you have been looking at
> this sort of scaling all the time for years.

It is about the same as what the monitor does, if not "corrected" with a
custom dot gain curve.  However, looking at if from the perspective of what
makes the best print, we are wasting precious grayscale.  If in 8 bit, our
256 steps is reduced to about 218 effective steps.  I'm not sure that is a
wise compromise at all. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

One caveat to this.  It is my understanding that the ICC spec does not
dictate the methodology used in perceptual intents.  The creator of the ICC
profile is free to employ whatever methodology they want.

Roy is doing a very simple thing.  He is making a transfer function by doing
three things: (1) recording the stimulus-response behaviour of the printer
(required) (2) scaling that stimulus-response data for media white point
(required) and (3) doing black point compensation according to Adobe's white
paper posted at www.color.org (not required but sensible - you'd invoke it
anyway.  FYI it does not matter whether you select it in the Print with
Preview pane because it is embedded in the ICC profile).

People - I am not a colour expert here.  I have just come up this learning
curve and I am trying to answer questions to the best of my ability!!

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:08:27 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Yes.  But in greyscale there is actually, I believe, no difference between
> relcol and perceptual. (You need to select perceptual in the driver so it
> links to the A2B0/B2A0 tables.)
>

I am not qualified to debate the merits of scaling in XYZ vs some other form
of scaling.  All I can say is that the ICC requires white point scaling in
XYZ for media relativity and Adobe does their black point compensation by
scaling in XYZ.  In some respects one might say "don't fight it Marsha -
it's bigger than both of us!".  The power of the soft proof is that for a
well calibrated monitor one can see the effect of the necessary tonal
compression - either way it is necessary cos that infinitely-sized peg just
isn't going to fit in that small printer space hole - and alter it if one
feels obliged.

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>

> 
> It is about the same as what the monitor does, if not "corrected" with a
> custom dot gain curve.  However, looking at if from the perspective of what
> makes the best print, we are wasting precious grayscale.  If in 8 bit, our
> 256 steps is reduced to about 218 effective steps.  I'm not sure that is a
> wise compromise at all.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

> 
> ... the ICC requires white point scaling in
> XYZ for media relativity and Adobe does their black point compensation by
> scaling in XYZ. 

Perhaps the "problem" is that XYZ and Lab L have different luminance
distributions.  The X-Rite "Color Guide" I have gives some very brief
explanations of these spaces.  With respect to XYZ, it notes, "The basic CIE
color space is CIE XYZ.  It is based on the visual capabilities of a
'Standard Observer,' ..."  On the other hand, in describing L*a*b* it notes
the "unbalanced nature of the XYZ space ..."  "As a result, the CIE
developed more uniform color scales called 'CIE L*a8b*' and "CIE L*u*v*.'"

Now, I think color was the context of the descriptions -- it is called
"color management" after all -- but I wonder if the same issues affect the
nature of the grayscale distributions.


> In some respects one might say "don't fight it Marsha -
> it's bigger than both of us!".  

True, but it might be worth trying to find the best of both worlds.

I note that my 2400 with the Advanced B&W, printing on EEM with tone set to
"Normal" produces a wonderful ramp with densities that are very close to the
standards that I have been using for a long time -- based on the Lab scale
and what the old Piezo B&W system used.  So, perhaps some at Epson also
think the standard color management assumptions are not optimal for B&W.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> > From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> 
> >
> > It is about the same as what the monitor does, if not "corrected" 
> > with a custom dot gain curve.  However, looking at if from the 
> > perspective of what makes the best print, we are wasting 
> > precious grayscale.  If in 8 bit, our
> > 256 steps is reduced to about 218 effective steps.  
> > I'm not sure that is a wise compromise at all.
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
> MODERATORS 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
> OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Paul,
Right click on the icc file and select "install profile".

To refresh the list, I open the custom softproof dialog.  That seems to
re-read the ICC directory.  I'm not sure if there is a better way, I
stumbled upon this one and have been using it since.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Paul Roark
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:23 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver

I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% - 100%
steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density distribution.

I was looking for an easy way to put the icc into the correct folder, but
have not found one yet.  If I open the icc with Notepad and save it,
Photoshop does not see it as an icc.

Is there a way to refresh the Photoshop icc list without closing and
re-opening the program?

Sorry for all the questions you guys have worked out long ago.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Paul

I just sent you this off-list as well.

OK here is my attempt to explain luminance scaling with respect to XYZ_Y and
not L*.  It¹s a simple explanation and represents my understanding.  I have
asked a guy who should know to give me his explanation and I¹ll make sure
you hear it.  Here goes:

People read too much into ³Lab is how the eye sees².  My understanding is
that humans perceive luminance first and colour second.  Ok so we need a
luminance component and a hue component.  Lab fits this bill but so does
XYZ.  To quote Bruce Fraser, Lab originated out of an ³attempt to create a
space that is perceptually uniform ­ in other words, distances between
points in the space predict how different the two colours will be to the
human observer.²  L* is ³approximately the cube root of the luminance value
Y (which is a rough approximation of our logarithmic response to
luminance).²  The bit in parentheses is critical.  Again from Bruce ³the
primary Y doubles as the average luminance function of the [eye¹s] cones.²
The eye sees luminance as described by XYZ_Y not L*.  It makes sense then to
scale for white point and black point in XYZ_Y.

It is this Y that we use when talking about density = -log10(XYZ_Y).  Logs
are nice because they turn non-linear responses such as the eye¹s
sensitivity to light into straight lines.


Cheers

Steve

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 11:52:55 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
>> 
>> ... the ICC requires white point scaling in
>> XYZ for media relativity and Adobe does their black point compensation by
>> scaling in XYZ. 
> 
> Perhaps the "problem" is that XYZ and Lab L have different luminance
> distributions.  The X-Rite "Color Guide" I have gives some very brief
> explanations of these spaces.  With respect to XYZ, it notes, "The basic CIE
> color space is CIE XYZ.  It is based on the visual capabilities of a
> 'Standard Observer,' ..."  On the other hand, in describing L*a*b* it notes
> the "unbalanced nature of the XYZ space ..."  "As a result, the CIE
> developed more uniform color scales called 'CIE L*a8b*' and "CIE L*u*v*.'"
> 
> Now, I think color was the context of the descriptions -- it is called
> "color management" after all -- but I wonder if the same issues affect the
> nature of the grayscale distributions.
> 
>

John,

> Right click on the icc file and select "install profile".

I get an error message that indicates the ICC is an invalid profile.

 
> To refresh the list, I open the custom softproof dialog.  That seems to
> re-read the ICC directory.  I'm not sure if there is a better way, I
> stumbled upon this one and have been using it since.

That sounds like a reasonably efficient way to do it.

Thanks.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Paul
> Roark
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:23 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I printed a 21-step test file with the icc that was created with this
> system, and the ramp is relatively dark with very compressed 90% - 100%
> steps.  It's not what I'd like to see as a final density distribution.
> 
> I was looking for an easy way to put the icc into the correct folder, but
> have not found one yet.  If I open the icc with Notepad and save it,
> Photoshop does not see it as an icc.
> 
> Is there a way to refresh the Photoshop icc list without closing and
> re-opening the program?
> 
> Sorry for all the questions you guys have worked out long ago.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
> MODERATORS 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
> OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Yikes!

Where did the art go?

Gary

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver


Paul et al

I thought it might be useful to talk about some of the pluses and minuses
(in relation to this discussion) of transfer curves vs custom dot gain ICC
profiles vs PS curves vs QTR Create ICC profiles.  When Roy first delved
into this following a long discussion we had where I was saying that
linearising to L* was not enough I immediately saw the potential of the
approach. Having made two "generic" ICC profiles, Roy then put it off to one
side for a while.  I wanted to take it further and be able to create ICC
profiles from actual rather than hypothetical data (as the generics did).  I
don't have Roy's programming skills so I was looking for another method of
creating them.  I had a bunch of conversations with Phil Green - yes the
"ask Phil" guy you see on www.color.org.  He kept saying "I don't see why
you don't just use a PS curve to put the right transform in place".  Bruce
Fraser alerted me to the fact that PS can generate an ICC profile from a
custom dot gain.  So I've been around the various options here but only as
my understanding of the topic was growing. Thankfully Roy became interested
in the subject again and really produced a great product.

"Custom Dot Gain ICC Profile Generation"

A very cool part of PS is that it can create a simple greyscale ICC profile
from Custom Dot Gain information.  This profile can (and is intended to)
then be used for printing.

I struggled with this initially because I thought I needed to be able to
move the end points in order to reflect paper white and ink black.  Later I
understood that the inputs into an ICC profile are media relative and so I
didn't need to be able to move the white point.  But you do still need to
get the white point info into the profile.  The inability to move the black
point (bottom left) is a problem. In order to do a soft proof of ink black
properly you can't give PS a profile that indicates that the printer can
achieve perfect black.  Checking Simulate Ink Black will merely leave the
deep blacks at monitor black and you miss one of the key points of soft
proofing B&W.  So that's a big negative for using the Custom Dot Gain
approach.

Of course the other issue is you still need to know the stimulus-response
behaviour of the printer (ie to be able to measure the luminance of your
step wedge) and then do the scaling calculations for media relativity
(adjusting for white point) and also BPC (because the inability to shift the
black point forces you to "embed" BPC).

The last issue is of course the limited number of observations that a Custom
Dot Gain can accommodate.

"PS Curves"

PS Curves are useful in two ways.  You can create a curve to use as a soft
proof of the printer behaviour (eg reduced black and dull white).  You can
also create a curve to modify the luminance of the file data so that it is
scaled for paper white (media relativity) and ink black (BPC).  But the two
curves are very different and you don't want the soft proof curve to still
be there when you send the file to print.  Also you don't want the scaling
curve to be left in the file because it is only relevant for a particular
media/printer setup. It's all a bit messy. Furthermore, you still need to be
able to do all the measuring and scaling calculations to get the curve(s)
right.  So the complexity of the task has not changed except for the fact
that once you have the calculations done you do have a mechanism for putting
them into effect - better than nothing.

"Transfer Curves"

A transfer curve is simply the second of the two curves I mentioned above.
It has the one great advantage of not being embedded in the file.  It is a
print only curve.  But you can't soft proof with a transfer curve.  In order
to soft proof even just luminance, you need to create a soft proof curve as
mentioned above.  So net-net Transfer Curves don't get you much further than
PS curves.

"ICC Profiles"

The cool thing about ICC output profiles is that they don't need to
"embedded" in the file by a conversion (ie a change of data info).  They can
be invoked only at printing (an on-the-fly conversion) and soft proofing.
Done properly they can provide a soft proof for ink black (ie no embedded
BPC).  [I looked at Colorshop X's Greyscalebuilder utility but it is clumsy
and can't be used to automate the input of actual data.  (It did, however,
greatly help in my understanding of media relativity - at first I couldn't
understand why when I changed the media white point the curve did fall from
the top right corner!)]

I thought the programming of an ICC builder that read actual
stimulus-response behaviour into a kTRC (grey tonal response curve) to be
daunting enough.  But having got this under control Roy quickly turned his
attention to the alternative method of using A2B0/B2A0 lookup tables.  When
Roy mentioned to me that he was getting to grips with how these tables
worked I said that would be awesome because he could record colour
information for the soft proof direction and still leave the printer
direction managing luminance only.  What we have now is a first draft of
exactly that and is an awesome achievement.

(One has to remember that it is very difficult to ask colour engineers
questions about this stuff.  They think and breathe colour and getting them
to help in the constrained B&W world can be difficult.  There is also a lot
of info at the ICC site but it's a lot of "this is" and not a lot of
"because of this" - ie a lot of factual stuff but little "why".  Roy has
done a tremendous job filtering through all this stuff for our benefit.)

Linearising vs Profiling

In theory a more linear printer means profiling is easier.  This is because
it is impractical for the profile to have every possible observation in it
(although it is much more practical for greyscale than colour) and so it
needs to interpolate between observations.  Linearity makes interpolation
easy.  But get enough observations in the sample and linearity becomes, I
think, less important.  I suspect, although I am not knowledgeable enough on
this stuff to be definitive, that for B&W so long as the printer has a
semblance of linearity then 51 observations is more than enough for sensible
output and linearising the printer becomes less relevant.  (I think the
whole Epson Colorbase trip we all went on a couple of weeks back was a wild
goose chase.)  My bet is that 51 observations would be enough to manage even
the crude Black Only luminance scale for example.  Only testing will tell.
Remember 51 observations (even 21) is a huge number of observations for a
single axis - imagine doing that number for each combination of 3 axes R, G
and B.

Now to practicalities.

One can pay the QTR shareware fee and use QTR Create ICC even if you don't
have an expensive spectrophotometer.  You can simply plug the hue data
(Lab's a* and b*) with zeros.  You will need a densitometer that either
outputs L* or XYZ_Y and then you can convert that to L* - ie you need to be
able to measure luminance.  But in the grand scheme of things these are
relatively cheap.  You will not be able to soft proof the hue of your output
but I think this is a secondary concern.  What I like about the QTR Create
ICC profiles the most is that my print workflow is now really very
automated.  I know that the profile will scale the image luminance properly
for my print media and simply need to focus on getting the image looking
right on screen.  The first soft proof really is the print "at size".

Even if one has to spot read the 21 or 51 patches this isn't so bad.
Getting the data into the right format is easy once you understand what
formats are allowed.  A simple text editor can do this.

Of course if you do have a spectrophotometer - and it doesn't have to be an
EyeOne - then you can include the a* and b* information and get a soft proof
of hue as well as luminance.

I hope this helps.

Steve
















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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

Wrong forum.  Try this one:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital-fineart/

On Oct 18, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Gary Brown wrote:

> Yikes!
>
> Where did the art go?
>
> Gary
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 2:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>
>
> Paul et al
>
> I thought it might be useful to talk about some of the pluses and  
> minuses
> (in relation to this discussion) of transfer curves vs custom dot  
> gain ICC
> profiles vs PS curves vs QTR Create ICC profiles.  When Roy first  
> delved
> into this following a long discussion we had where I was saying that
> linearising to L* was not enough I immediately saw the potential of  
> the
> approach. Having made two "generic" ICC profiles, Roy then put it  
> off to one
> side for a while.  I wanted to take it further and be able to  
> create ICC
> profiles from actual rather than hypothetical data (as the generics  
> did).  I
> don't have Roy's programming skills so I was looking for another  
> method of
> creating them.  I had a bunch of conversations with Phil Green -  
> yes the
> "ask Phil" guy you see on www.color.org.  He kept saying "I don't  
> see why
> you don't just use a PS curve to put the right transform in  
> place".  Bruce
> Fraser alerted me to the fact that PS can generate an ICC profile  
> from a
> custom dot gain.  So I've been around the various options here but  
> only as
> my understanding of the topic was growing. Thankfully Roy became  
> interested
> in the subject again and really produced a great product.
>
> "Custom Dot Gain ICC Profile Generation"
>
> A very cool part of PS is that it can create a simple greyscale ICC  
> profile
> from Custom Dot Gain information.  This profile can (and is  
> intended to)
> then be used for printing.
>
> I struggled with this initially because I thought I needed to be  
> able to
> move the end points in order to reflect paper white and ink black.   
> Later I
> understood that the inputs into an ICC profile are media relative  
> and so I
> didn't need to be able to move the white point.  But you do still  
> need to
> get the white point info into the profile.  The inability to move  
> the black
> point (bottom left) is a problem. In order to do a soft proof of  
> ink black
> properly you can't give PS a profile that indicates that the  
> printer can
> achieve perfect black.  Checking Simulate Ink Black will merely  
> leave the
> deep blacks at monitor black and you miss one of the key points of  
> soft
> proofing B&W.  So that's a big negative for using the Custom Dot Gain
> approach.
>
> Of course the other issue is you still need to know the stimulus- 
> response
> behaviour of the printer (ie to be able to measure the luminance of  
> your
> step wedge) and then do the scaling calculations for media relativity
> (adjusting for white point) and also BPC (because the inability to  
> shift the
> black point forces you to "embed" BPC).
>
> The last issue is of course the limited number of observations that  
> a Custom
> Dot Gain can accommodate.
>
> "PS Curves"
>
> PS Curves are useful in two ways.  You can create a curve to use as  
> a soft
> proof of the printer behaviour (eg reduced black and dull white).   
> You can
> also create a curve to modify the luminance of the file data so  
> that it is
> scaled for paper white (media relativity) and ink black (BPC).  But  
> the two
> curves are very different and you don't want the soft proof curve  
> to still
> be there when you send the file to print.  Also you don't want the  
> scaling
> curve to be left in the file because it is only relevant for a  
> particular
> media/printer setup. It's all a bit messy. Furthermore, you still  
> need to be
> able to do all the measuring and scaling calculations to get the  
> curve(s)
> right.  So the complexity of the task has not changed except for  
> the fact
> that once you have the calculations done you do have a mechanism  
> for putting
> them into effect - better than nothing.
>
> "Transfer Curves"
>
> A transfer curve is simply the second of the two curves I mentioned  
> above.
> It has the one great advantage of not being embedded in the file.   
> It is a
> print only curve.  But you can't soft proof with a transfer curve.   
> In order
> to soft proof even just luminance, you need to create a soft proof  
> curve as
> mentioned above.  So net-net Transfer Curves don't get you much  
> further than
> PS curves.
>
> "ICC Profiles"
>
> The cool thing about ICC output profiles is that they don't need to
> "embedded" in the file by a conversion (ie a change of data info).   
> They can
> be invoked only at printing (an on-the-fly conversion) and soft  
> proofing.
> Done properly they can provide a soft proof for ink black (ie no  
> embedded
> BPC).  [I looked at Colorshop X's Greyscalebuilder utility but it  
> is clumsy
> and can't be used to automate the input of actual data.  (It did,  
> however,
> greatly help in my understanding of media relativity - at first I  
> couldn't
> understand why when I changed the media white point the curve did  
> fall from
> the top right corner!)]
>
> I thought the programming of an ICC builder that read actual
> stimulus-response behaviour into a kTRC (grey tonal response curve)  
> to be
> daunting enough.  But having got this under control Roy quickly  
> turned his
> attention to the alternative method of using A2B0/B2A0 lookup  
> tables.  When
> Roy mentioned to me that he was getting to grips with how these tables
> worked I said that would be awesome because he could record colour
> information for the soft proof direction and still leave the printer
> direction managing luminance only.  What we have now is a first  
> draft of
> exactly that and is an awesome achievement.
>
> (One has to remember that it is very difficult to ask colour engineers
> questions about this stuff.  They think and breathe colour and  
> getting them
> to help in the constrained B&W world can be difficult.  There is  
> also a lot
> of info at the ICC site but it's a lot of "this is" and not a lot of
> "because of this" - ie a lot of factual stuff but little "why".   
> Roy has
> done a tremendous job filtering through all this stuff for our  
> benefit.)
>
> Linearising vs Profiling
>
> In theory a more linear printer means profiling is easier.  This is  
> because
> it is impractical for the profile to have every possible  
> observation in it
> (although it is much more practical for greyscale than colour) and  
> so it
> needs to interpolate between observations.  Linearity makes  
> interpolation
> easy.  But get enough observations in the sample and linearity  
> becomes, I
> think, less important.  I suspect, although I am not knowledgeable  
> enough on
> this stuff to be definitive, that for B&W so long as the printer has a
> semblance of linearity then 51 observations is more than enough for  
> sensible
> output and linearising the printer becomes less relevant.  (I think  
> the
> whole Epson Colorbase trip we all went on a couple of weeks back  
> was a wild
> goose chase.)  My bet is that 51 observations would be enough to  
> manage even
> the crude Black Only luminance scale for example.  Only testing  
> will tell.
> Remember 51 observations (even 21) is a huge number of observations  
> for a
> single axis - imagine doing that number for each combination of 3  
> axes R, G
> and B.
>
> Now to practicalities.
>
> One can pay the QTR shareware fee and use QTR Create ICC even if  
> you don't
> have an expensive spectrophotometer.  You can simply plug the hue data
> (Lab's a* and b*) with zeros.  You will need a densitometer that  
> either
> outputs L* or XYZ_Y and then you can convert that to L* - ie you  
> need to be
> able to measure luminance.  But in the grand scheme of things these  
> are
> relatively cheap.  You will not be able to soft proof the hue of  
> your output
> but I think this is a secondary concern.  What I like about the QTR  
> Create
> ICC profiles the most is that my print workflow is now really very
> automated.  I know that the profile will scale the image luminance  
> properly
> for my print media and simply need to focus on getting the image  
> looking
> right on screen.  The first soft proof really is the print "at size".
>
> Even if one has to spot read the 21 or 51 patches this isn't so bad.
> Getting the data into the right format is easy once you understand  
> what
> formats are allowed.  A simple text editor can do this.
>
> Of course if you do have a spectrophotometer - and it doesn't have  
> to be an
> EyeOne - then you can include the a* and b* information and get a  
> soft proof
> of hue as well as luminance.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Steve
>

Even if you meant this sarcastically - I appreciate the referal - 
I'm now a member of both forums - as I find both perspectives 
useful. 

I don't mind highly technical threads such as this one and I do find 
much of it helpful, even if I don't utilize all the info directly. 

I am hopeful, however, that this group can accomodate both types of 
threads as I know there are many of us who wish to use digital grey-
scale printing for art making (Paul Roark, who asked this question 
in the 1st place, for example), just as there are others whose 
primary interest lies, for lack of a better word, in the 
elegant 'science' of it all....michael

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield 
<scho@m...> wrote:
>
> Wrong forum.  Try this one:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital-fineart/
> 
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Gary Brown wrote:
> 
> > Yikes!
> >
> > Where did the art go?
> >
> > Gary
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@b...>
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 2:36 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson 
driver

I use PWP. What is meant by "adjustment curves"? Is this different
from just norml B&W curves which are loadable from files?

PWP doesn't seem to support B&W ICC profiles. When I use the
QTR supplied RGB profiles for gray matte or whatever (for Qimage?),
the images in PWP look really, really weird.

Any other PWP experiences to share here?

Scott

Paul Roark wrote:

> Clayton,
>
> >
> > >Elements does not include curves adjustments, unfortunately.
> >
> > Oh, too bad. Does Picture Window allow adjustment curves?
>
> Yes, it's been the cheap alternative I've recommended. I'm not sure how
> many people use it, however. Elements, being Adobe, has a much higher
> profile.
>
>
> >
> > ... I do not
> > flatten these curves permanently into the image. I keep them strictly
> > as adjustments for output and the master image isn't altered. So
> > conceptually they are used like TF curves. I can tweak them for
> > variations in paper batches.
>
> I know a lot of people keep the curves on a layer, but I've also seen 
> people
> forget to de-activate them while editing or forget to activate them for
> printing. The TF area for loading the curves avoids these problems.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd 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 \ufffdOWNER\ufffd 
> AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd 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 \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     * Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint>" on
>       the web.
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

The curves are in the gray transform area of PW, at least as I remember.
There are 2 ways to load a curve.  One of the buttons is able to "see" the
Photoshop curves, the other is not.  I don't know why.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott
> McLoughlin
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:11 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I use PWP. What is meant by "adjustment curves"? Is this different
> from just norml B&W curves which are loadable from files?
> 
> PWP doesn't seem to support B&W ICC profiles. When I use the
> QTR supplied RGB profiles for gray matte or whatever (for Qimage?),
> the images in PWP look really, really weird.
> 
> Any other PWP experiences to share here?
> 
> Scott
> 
> Paul Roark wrote:
> 
> > Clayton,
> >
> > >
> > > >Elements does not include curves adjustments, unfortunately.
> > >
> > > Oh, too bad. Does Picture Window allow adjustment curves?
> >
> > Yes, it's been the cheap alternative I've recommended. I'm not sure how
> > many people use it, however. Elements, being Adobe, has a much higher
> > profile.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > ... I do not
> > > flatten these curves permanently into the image. I keep them strictly
> > > as adjustments for output and the master image isn't altered. So
> > > conceptually they are used like TF curves. I can tweak them for
> > > variations in paper batches.
> >
> > I know a lot of people keep the curves on a layer, but I've also seen
> > people
> > forget to de-activate them while editing or forget to activate them for
> > printing. The TF area for loading the curves avoids these problems.
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER"
> > AND "MODERATORS" 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 "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >     * Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint>" on
> >       the web.
> >     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >       DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >       <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-
> unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> >     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> >       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" 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
> "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mjvendrell2" 
<mjvendrell2@y...> wrote:
 I know there are many of us who wish to use digital grey-
> scale printing for art making (Paul Roark, who asked this question 
> in the 1st place, for example), just as there are others whose 
> primary interest lies, for lack of a better word, in the 
> elegant 'science' of it all.

I really doubt very much that there's a significant proportion of the forum membership 
whose "primary interest" lies...in merely the elegant science of it all. IMHO, it would 
be the very rare person who delves deeply into B&W digital printing without having a 
_primary_ interest in using it as  a medium for their own artistic expression. 
Otherwise...why bother? Naturally I'm excluding those very, very few who might have 
purely commercial (not creative art) motives. Not that there's anything wrong with 
that...;-)

Those of us without the ability, time, or interest to concern ourselves with the highly 
technical aspects of B&W digital printing should be very grateful for those in our midst 
who find the time and energy (what I'm certain is _additional_ time and energy ) to 
develop, teach and share the "science" that serves the art.

Phil

I just discovered that happens with the v2.3.1 create icc tool.  V2.3.0 does
not do that.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Paul Roark
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:19 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver

John,

> Right click on the icc file and select "install profile".

I get an error message that indicates the ICC is an invalid profile.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Phil, I couldn't agree more fully, and please count me
among the grateful...michael

> 
> Those of us without the ability, time, or interest
> to concern ourselves with the highly 
> technical aspects of B&W digital printing should be
> very grateful for those in our midst 
> who find the time and energy (what I'm certain is
> _additional_ time and energy ) to 
> develop, teach and share the "science" that serves
> the art.
> 
> Phil
> 
> 
> 
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

It is often difficult to explain the technical rationale behind a
methodology that makes things a lot easier.  But that shouldn't deny those
who are interested in understanding, those who are interested in challenging
ideas, and those who are interested in moving forward from learning
something new.  Only that way will ideas and practices gain credence and
acceptance and allow those who don't care to understand the rationale to
follow with confidence.  People should be free to ask any question here that
deals with Digital Black & White: The Print.

-"Yikes!

-Where did the art go?"

My comment was meant to be humorous, as well as point out the shear depth of 
the technical discussions of the last 24 hours. That said, even though I 
consider myself to be one of the less technical (scientific) members of this 
group, the quality of my B/W printing has improved significantly because of 
the information and advice I have picked up from those that are.

So, do your own thing and take a chill pill.

Gary

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver


It is often difficult to explain the technical rationale behind a
methodology that makes things a lot easier.  But that shouldn't deny those
who are interested in understanding, those who are interested in challenging
ideas, and those who are interested in moving forward from learning
something new.  Only that way will ideas and practices gain credence and
acceptance and allow those who don't care to understand the rationale to
follow with confidence.  People should be free to ask any question here that
deals with Digital Black & White: The Print.







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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

FYI this is the response I received from Phil Green at the London College of
Communication - the same Phil Green whose names appears at the top of the
www.color.org International Color Consortium site:

"Two points: the operation may be defined in XYZ but that does not mean
it has to be implemented in XYZ; and a scaling operation will have the
same effect whether it is implemented in XYZ or CIELAB, the only
difference being a slight shift in the low XYZ values close to the
threshold where the cube root function is replaced by a linear scaling."

FYI the points I quoted below were from Bruce Fraser's Real World Color
Management (pg 41 and 42).

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:59:12 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul
> 
> I just sent you this off-list as well.
> 
> OK here is my attempt to explain luminance scaling with respect to XYZ_Y and
> not L*.  It¹s a simple explanation and represents my understanding.  I have
> asked a guy who should know to give me his explanation and I¹ll make sure
> you hear it.  Here goes:
> 
> People read too much into ³Lab is how the eye sees².  My understanding is
> that humans perceive luminance first and colour second.  Ok so we need a
> luminance component and a hue component.  Lab fits this bill but so does
> XYZ.  To quote Bruce Fraser, Lab originated out of an ³attempt to create a
> space that is perceptually uniform ­ in other words, distances between
> points in the space predict how different the two colours will be to the
> human observer.²  L* is ³approximately the cube root of the luminance value
> Y (which is a rough approximation of our logarithmic response to
> luminance).²  The bit in parentheses is critical.  Again from Bruce ³the
> primary Y doubles as the average luminance function of the [eye¹s] cones.²
> The eye sees luminance as described by XYZ_Y not L*.  It makes sense then to
> scale for white point and black point in XYZ_Y.
> 
> It is this Y that we use when talking about density = -log10(XYZ_Y).  Logs
> are nice because they turn non-linear responses such as the eye¹s
> sensitivity to light into straight lines.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve

Just a quick follow up to this. Unfortunately it isn't possible to convert
X-rite 810-type colour density readings to CIE Lab. The 810 is a filter
densitometer which is a different beast to a modern spectrodensitometer
which can make both types of readings (although of course, the Vis density
reading can be converted to Lab Lightness).

Howard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
> Behalf Of Howard Shaw
> Sent: 18 October 2005 11:55
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> 
> Steve Kale wrote,
> >
> > From Roy's post announcing the new version that I mentioned
> > in an earlier post (formatting distorted in post):
> > 
> > Supports a more general data input file. Anything
> > columnar,
> > looks for column headings of:
> > 
> > GRAY
> > L, LAB, LAB_L, A, LAB_A, B, LAB_B
> > D, DENSITY, V, VISUAL
> > 
> > 
> The X-rite 810 produces two types of data - density readings 
> (called "Vis") and "RGB" readings for colour information. I 
> understand how to use the Density readings in the text file 
> for Create-ICC but I'm not sure how to convert the RGB 
> readings (which are on the same density scale as the Vis
> readings) to Lab_A & Lab_B. Is this possible?
> 
> Thanks
> Howard
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> --------------------~--> 
> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! 
> your home page 
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ucIolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ------~-> 
> 
> 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 "Group 
> Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>

Steve,

I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might just be an
artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  So, I tried
the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing setup that
had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% point between
100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I was also
curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.

The results were not much different than my previous attempts.  Whereas the
un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points reasonably,
the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones and
posterized the 95% - 100% range.

I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an output that
efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 




> 
> this is the response I received from Phil Green at the London College of
> Communication - the same Phil Green whose names appears at the top of the
> www.color.org International Color Consortium site:
> 
> "Two points: the operation may be defined in XYZ but that does not mean
> it has to be implemented in XYZ; and a scaling operation will have the
> same effect whether it is implemented in XYZ or CIELAB, the only
> difference being a slight shift in the low XYZ values close to the
> threshold where the cube root function is replaced by a linear scaling."
> 
> FYI the points I quoted below were from Bruce Fraser's Real World Color
> Management (pg 41 and 42).
> 
> ...
> >To quote Bruce Fraser, Lab originated out of an 
> > ³attempt to create a
> > space that is perceptually uniform ­ in other words, distances between
> > points in the space predict how different the two colours will be to the
> > human observer.²  L* is ³approximately the cube root of the 
> > luminance value
> > Y (which is a rough approximation of our logarithmic response to
> > luminance).²  The bit in parentheses is critical.  Again from Bruce
³the
> > primary Y doubles as the average luminance function of the 
> > [eye¹s] cones.²
> > The eye sees luminance as described by XYZ_Y not L*.  It makes sense
> then to
> > scale for white point and black point in XYZ_Y.
> >
> > It is this Y that we use when talking about density = -log10(XYZ_Y).
> Logs
> > are nice because they turn non-linear responses such as the eye¹s
> > sensitivity to light into straight lines.
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines?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 �OWNER?AND
> �MODERATORS?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  �OWNER?AND
> �MODERATORS?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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Please define exactly what you mean by "separation".  Can you also post the
90% K, 95% K and 100% K L* readings and the blank media white reading.

Again the question is one of gamma.  (I can not speak for the
"posterization" you see.)

An example might help.  I am currently looking at a 101 step wedge in PS (I
can send you the tiff file if you want it).  I assigned the Gray Gamma 2.2
profile (the most broadly used gamma today) to the tiff.  I have set my
Second Color Readout in the Info palette to Lab.  As I run the cursor over
the steps from 100 down, it is not until I get to 94% K that the Lab reading
hits 2.  Would you say that this workspace doesn't have good separation?

If instead I assign Gray Gamma 1.8 to the document I hit Lab 2 at 97% and by
the time I get to 94% K Lab is 5.

I think we can agree that the dynamic range of a printer/ink/paper medium is
defined by the range from ink black to paper white.  Once we have determined
ink loads etc (or Epson has done it for us) that range doesn't change
whether we decide to linearise it (if we can) or whether we change our image
in any way.  So the full scale is still available to us - nothing is lost.
The question at hand is how luminance makes it from black to white - ie
gamma - when we have to map from perfect black in our image file to an
imperfect black on paper at one end and from perfect white to imperfect
white on the other.

In this specific case, we are essentially debating whether the gamma created
by (a) the two limits of our dynamic range, (2) ICC white point scaling at
one end, and (3) Adobe black point compensation is "appropriate".  Or
whether some other shape would form a better basis for work.  (With of
course the assumption that Roy has correctly implemented these.)  It is
worth noting that the colour world faces exactly the same question with no
less importance.  A colour photographer is equally concerned about "shadow
compression".  (Consider a photo with colourful highlights but largely
neutral shadows.)  It is not the absence of hue that makes this issue
important.  Some considerable comfort should be gained from the fact that
Roy has adopted ICC and Adobe practice.

Looking at the movement of Lab in the above two greyscale spaces it is not
unreasonable to see that when we map from a perfect black to imperfect black
on paper, given the eye is good at resetting its perception of black and
white points, that we would want a similar sort of rate of change of
luminance at the black end (and white end) of the scale in the print.

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:37:34 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might just be an
> artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  So, I tried
> the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing setup that
> had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% point between
> 100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I was also
> curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.
> 
> The results were not much different than my previous attempts.  Whereas the
> un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points reasonably,
> the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones and
> posterized the 95% - 100% range.
> 
> I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an output that
> efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

BTW for those (few ;-) ) that are interested, the short white paper by Adobe
on Black Point Compensation is located here:

http://www.color.org/Adobe1bpc.pdf

The maths is at the very end, in section 6 where the formula for "Black
Point Stage" is given.  I am not good with maths but (having had Carl
Schofield remind me twice) I do know that the formula for DecodeLab(L) is
simply XYZ_Y.

(Carl provided me with L*x27/24389 for 0<L*<8 which is the same.)

So the Black Point Stage is a diagonal matrix containing the ratio:

Scale = (1-Yd)/(1-Ys)

Where Yd is the XYZ_Y of the destination black and Ys is the XYZ_Y of the
source black.  

Simplifying the statement to XYZ_Y is where my comprehension ends.  Unlike
Roy I have not had to apply that formula.  It talks of a diagonal matrix
which I think for our case is not relevant in that we are only scaling
luminance.  

Time to head out for dinner...

You explained it well enough for those seeking to learn more. I also 
applaud your evenhanded approach vis a vie the Pshop curves,Transfer 
curves,custom dot gain settings etc. For some of us on PCs, in the 
earlier versions of Windows and Pshop, those methods were primary 
because color management wasn't fully functional at the time on that 
platform.

Regards
Duane


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> It is often difficult to explain the technical rationale behind a
> methodology that makes things a lot easier.  But that shouldn't 
deny those
> who are interested in understanding, those who are interested in 
challenging
> ideas, and those who are interested in moving forward from learning
> something new.  Only that way will ideas and practices gain 
credence and
> acceptance and allow those who don't care to understand the 
rationale to
> follow with confidence.  People should be free to ask any question 
here that
> deals with Digital Black & White: The Print.
>

Paul,

I thought the steps had to be evenly spaced, but maybe not if you  
were able to generate an icc profile.  Can you post the text file  
that was generated when you made the icc profile?  I'm just wondering  
how Create-icc  treated the uneven steps.  My experience has been  
that the icc profiles improve shadow separation in 2400 ABW prints,  
rather than compress the data.

Carl

On Oct 19, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Paul Roark wrote:

> Steve,
>
> I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might  
> just be an
> artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  So,  
> I tried
> the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing  
> setup that
> had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% point  
> between
> 100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I was  
> also
> curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.
>
> The results were not much different than my previous attempts.   
> Whereas the
> un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points  
> reasonably,
> the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones and
> posterized the 95% - 100% range.
>
> I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an output  
> that
> efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Carl,

Here it is.  I'll have more time to get to this later.  I don't know if it's
the uneven steps, PC or what that is crushing the shadows.  For manual
input, however, an uneven entry really helps.  The shadows are almost always
were the action is.  I'll post the actual Lab L readings later. 


File: C:\Documents and Settings\Paul Roark\Desktop\C86_G2_Con-10-out.txt
Step	Dens	Lab	A	B	
0.00	0.034	97.00	0	0	-                             b
L +
10.00	0.148	87.52	0	0	-                             b
L       +
20.00	0.233	81.03	0	0	-                             b
L           +
30.00	0.338	73.52	0	0	-                             b
L               +
40.00	0.465	65.16	0	0	-                             b
L                    +
50.00	0.599	57.24	0	0	-                             b   L
+
60.00	0.783	47.62	0	0	-                           L b
+
70.00	1.012	37.36	0	0	-                     L       b
+
80.00	1.229	29.17	0	0	-                L            b
+
85.00	1.340	25.49	0	0	-              L              b
+
90.00	1.429	22.74	0	0	-            L                b
+
95.00	1.519	20.15	0	0	-           L                 b
+
96.00	1.534	19.74	0	0	-          L                  b
+
97.00	1.542	19.51	0	0	-          L                  b
+
98.00	1.572	18.71	0	0	-          L                  b
+
99.00	1.574	18.66	0	0	-          L                  b
+
100.00	1.607	17.80	0	0	-         L                   b
+

Created ICC file C:\Documents and Settings\Paul
Roark\Desktop\C86_G2_Con-10.icc

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

_______________________________

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Schofield
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:54 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> I thought the steps had to be evenly spaced, but maybe not if you
> were able to generate an icc profile.  Can you post the text file
> that was generated when you made the icc profile?  I'm just wondering
> how Create-icc  treated the uneven steps.  My experience has been
> that the icc profiles improve shadow separation in 2400 ABW prints,
> rather than compress the data.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 19, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Paul Roark wrote:
> 
> > Steve,
> >
> > I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might
> > just be an
> > artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  So,
> > I tried
> > the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing
> > setup that
> > had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% point
> > between
> > 100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I was
> > also
> > curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.
> >
> > The results were not much different than my previous attempts.
> > Whereas the
> > un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points
> > reasonably,
> > the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones and
> > posterized the 95% - 100% range.
> >
> > I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an output
> > that
> > efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
> MODERATORS 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
> OWNER AND MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

I have not read the last few posts on this subject but I thought I'd throw
this out for thought - I myself am still thinking about it (still awke at
1am) and I wish I could consult someone that new the answer!

Sketch the following.  Light intensity on the x axis from 0 to the "standard
illuminant" D50 lighting.  First plot "perceived brightness". As we know
human vision is not linear and you get sharp increases in perceived
brightness at the beginning, flattening ever more off as we approach full
brightness of our illuminant (same applies to all human sensory experience:
sweetness, bitterness, audible volume etc).  From everything I have read
XYZ_Y is about the best model of human "perceived brightness" we have.  So
this plot is best approximated by XYZ_Y and is 100 (or 1 depending on
notation) at the standard illuminant.

Now plot L*.  L* is a linear concept.  As we move from no light to full
light L* moves evenly from 0 to 100.  When we get to 100% of the standard
illuminant, L* is 100.  Does this make sense so far?  I think it does.

Now compare the two lines.  At the low end of the scale very small increases
in L* are associated with large increases in perceived brightness (loosely
labelled luminance).

Maybe I am talking through a hole in my head here but does this answer our
issue about small gradations in  L* at the dark end of a visually pleasing
greyscale?

Forget that - it's completely flawed.  A linear Lab model from perfect black
to perfect standard illuminant white suitably models our vision process.

Generating a linear Lab profile is a compressed environment is easy.  We do
that when we linearise the printer.  But we know this results in flat,
lifeless prints.  Colour guys go on to do scale for the imperfect black and
white points and something's gotta give.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 01:09:09 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> 
> I have not read the last few posts on this subject but I thought I'd throw
> this out for thought - I myself am still thinking about it (still awke at
> 1am) and I wish I could consult someone that new the answer!
> 
> Sketch the following.  Light intensity on the x axis from 0 to the "standard
> illuminant" D50 lighting.  First plot "perceived brightness". As we know
> human vision is not linear and you get sharp increases in perceived
> brightness at the beginning, flattening ever more off as we approach full
> brightness of our illuminant (same applies to all human sensory experience:
> sweetness, bitterness, audible volume etc).  From everything I have read
> XYZ_Y is about the best model of human "perceived brightness" we have.  So
> this plot is best approximated by XYZ_Y and is 100 (or 1 depending on
> notation) at the standard illuminant.
> 
> Now plot L*.  L* is a linear concept.  As we move from no light to full
> light L* moves evenly from 0 to 100.  When we get to 100% of the standard
> illuminant, L* is 100.  Does this make sense so far?  I think it does.
> 
> Now compare the two lines.  At the low end of the scale very small increases
> in L* are associated with large increases in perceived brightness (loosely
> labelled luminance).
> 
> Maybe I am talking through a hole in my head here but does this answer our
> issue about small gradations in  L* at the dark end of a visually pleasing
> greyscale?
>

My experience too. 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield 
<scho@m...> wrote:
>
> Paul,
> 
> I thought the steps had to be evenly spaced, but maybe not if you  
> were able to generate an icc profile.  Can you post the text file  
> that was generated when you made the icc profile?  I'm just 
wondering  
> how Create-icc  treated the uneven steps.  My experience has been  
> that the icc profiles improve shadow separation in 2400 ABW 
prints,  
> rather than compress the data.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 19, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Paul Roark wrote:
> 
> > Steve,
> >
> > I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might  
> > just be an
> > artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  
So,  
> > I tried
> > the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing  
> > setup that
> > had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% 
point  
> > between
> > 100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I 
was  
> > also
> > curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.
> >
> > The results were not much different than my previous attempts.   
> > Whereas the
> > un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points  
> > reasonably,
> > the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones 
and
> > posterized the 95% - 100% range.
> >
> > I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an 
output  

> > that
> > efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.
> >
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I haven't had enough time to keep up with all the posts so I'm a bit late.

Anyway, yes the uneven steps are the culprit.  It wasn't intended to handle
uneven steps but in the 2.3.1 version it turns out that it works in one 
direction -- B2A0 but not in A2B0.   This is obviously a nice feature and
so I've added this to the next version already.   I'm in the final testing of
2.3.2 and should have this available very soon.

Another comment that goes back to the original question about ICC profiles
versus Transfer Functions or .acv Adjustment curves.

In general they all have the same basic capability -- you can adjust the midtones
to where you want them between white & black.  However the chief benefit
of color management and icc profiles is that the curve is calculated at print
time to match up the file's profile and the printer's profile.  So instead of a
curve that only works for a specific grayscale such as GG 2.2 you can use any
file profile -- GG 1.8,  Dot Gain 25%, even Adobe RGB or sRGB.  Since this
whole color management is happening on your screen, it makes a lot of
sense for it to happen on printing too.

It has another very convenient feature in that the ICC curves are all applied in
16 bit mode and intelligently (dithering) converted back to 8 bit for printing.  
This is exactly like taking your data file, converting to 16 bit, applying your .acv
curve adjustments and then converting back to 8 bit. 

Roy


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:

>
> Carl,
> 
> Here it is.  I'll have more time to get to this later.  I don't know if it's
> the uneven steps, PC or what that is crushing the shadows.  For manual
> input, however, an uneven entry really helps.  The shadows are almost always
> were the action is.  I'll post the actual Lab L readings later. 
> 
> 
> File: C:\Documents and Settings\Paul Roark\Desktop\C86_G2_Con-10-out.txt
> Step	Dens	Lab	A	B	
> 0.00	0.034	97.00	0	0	-                             b
> L +
> 10.00	0.148	87.52	0	0	-                             b
> L       +
> 20.00	0.233	81.03	0	0	-                             b
> L           +
> 30.00	0.338	73.52	0	0	-                             b
> L               +
> 40.00	0.465	65.16	0	0	-                             b
> L                    +
> 50.00	0.599	57.24	0	0	-                             b   L
> +
> 60.00	0.783	47.62	0	0	-                           L b
> +
> 70.00	1.012	37.36	0	0	-                     L       b
> +
> 80.00	1.229	29.17	0	0	-                L            b
> +
> 85.00	1.340	25.49	0	0	-              L              b
> +
> 90.00	1.429	22.74	0	0	-            L                b
> +
> 95.00	1.519	20.15	0	0	-           L                 b
> +
> 96.00	1.534	19.74	0	0	-          L                  b
> +
> 97.00	1.542	19.51	0	0	-          L                  b
> +
> 98.00	1.572	18.71	0	0	-          L                  b
> +
> 99.00	1.574	18.66	0	0	-          L                  b
> +
> 100.00	1.607	17.80	0	0	-         L                   b
> +
> 
> Created ICC file C:\Documents and Settings\Paul
> Roark\Desktop\C86_G2_Con-10.icc
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> _______________________________
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> > Schofield
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:54 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > I thought the steps had to be evenly spaced, but maybe not if you
> > were able to generate an icc profile.  Can you post the text file
> > that was generated when you made the icc profile?  I'm just wondering
> > how Create-icc  treated the uneven steps.  My experience has been
> > that the icc profiles improve shadow separation in 2400 ABW prints,
> > rather than compress the data.
> > 
> > Carl
> > 
> > On Oct 19, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Paul Roark wrote:
> > 
> > > Steve,
> > >
> > > I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might
> > > just be an
> > > artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  So,
> > > I tried
> > > the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing
> > > setup that
> > > had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% point
> > > between
> > > 100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I was
> > > also
> > > curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.
> > >
> > > The results were not much different than my previous attempts.
> > > Whereas the
> > > un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points
> > > reasonably,
> > > the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones and
> > > posterized the 95% - 100% range.
> > >
> > > I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an output
> > > that
> > > efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com

Ah.  I now see what you mean! I thought you were still feeding evenly spaced
data but just noting for this conversation observations that weren't. Duh.
I was too rushed.

This is the risk I mentioned earlier when Carl noted that QTR Create ICC
could operate without the Gray reference column.  I don't think QTR Create
ICC should make any assumptions about to what stimulus the output
corresponded to.  Hence the minimum input file should also have the GRAY
column (as in the version I sent you Paul) and QTR Create ICC should make
use (if it is at all possible from a programming perspective) of this
column.

From my earlier post in response to Carl:

"I guess QTR Create ICC can simply assume the
steps are evenly spaced...If so anyone using less than 100 would need to
make sure their steps are.  Personally I think this is a risk and if this is
one way Roy is making the data input file more flexible I would ask him to
reverse it. One might want to do say 60 steps and have more data points at
the dark end.  Having the input co-ordinate and not assuming it makes sense
to me."

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:54:40 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Carl,
> 
> Here it is.  I'll have more time to get to this later.  I don't know if it's
> the uneven steps, PC or what that is crushing the shadows.  For manual
> input, however, an uneven entry really helps.  The shadows are almost always
> were the action is.  I'll post the actual Lab L readings later.
> 
> 
> File: C:\Documents and Settings\Paul Roark\Desktop\C86_G2_Con-10-out.txt
> Step Dens Lab A B 
> 0.00 0.034 97.00 0 0 -                             b
> L +
> 10.00 0.148 87.52 0 0 -                             b
> L       +
> 20.00 0.233 81.03 0 0 -                             b
> L           +
> 30.00 0.338 73.52 0 0 -                             b
> L               +
> 40.00 0.465 65.16 0 0 -                             b
> L                    +
> 50.00 0.599 57.24 0 0 -                             b   L
> +
> 60.00 0.783 47.62 0 0 -                           L b
> +
> 70.00 1.012 37.36 0 0 -                     L       b
> +
> 80.00 1.229 29.17 0 0 -                L            b
> +
> 85.00 1.340 25.49 0 0 -              L              b
> +
> 90.00 1.429 22.74 0 0 -            L                b
> +
> 95.00 1.519 20.15 0 0 -           L                 b
> +
> 96.00 1.534 19.74 0 0 -          L                  b
> +
> 97.00 1.542 19.51 0 0 -          L                  b
> +
> 98.00 1.572 18.71 0 0 -          L                  b
> +
> 99.00 1.574 18.66 0 0 -          L                  b
> +
> 100.00 1.607 17.80 0 0 -         L                   b
> +
> 
> Created ICC file C:\Documents and Settings\Paul
> Roark\Desktop\C86_G2_Con-10.icc
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> _______________________________
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Carl
>> Schofield
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:54 AM
>> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>> 
>> Paul,
>> 
>> I thought the steps had to be evenly spaced, but maybe not if you
>> were able to generate an icc profile.  Can you post the text file
>> that was generated when you made the icc profile?  I'm just wondering
>> how Create-icc  treated the uneven steps.  My experience has been
>> that the icc profiles improve shadow separation in 2400 ABW prints,
>> rather than compress the data.
>> 
>> Carl
>> 
>> On Oct 19, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Paul Roark wrote:
>> 
>>> Steve,
>>> 
>>> I thought maybe my, in my view too-compressed, low values might
>>> just be an
>>> artifact of a bad un-adjusted distribution and too few points.  So,
>>> I tried
>>> the Create ICC and Print with Preview workflow with a printing
>>> setup that
>>> had a reasonably smooth low end.  I took readings at every 1% point
>>> between
>>> 100% and 95%, then at 5% to 80%, and then at 10% intervals.  I was
>>> also
>>> curious if the program needed even distributions of input data.
>>> 
>>> The results were not much different than my previous attempts.
>>> Whereas the
>>> un-adjusted printing setup separated all the 95% - 100% points
>>> reasonably,
>>> the output adjusted with the Create ICC compressed the dark tones and
>>> posterized the 95% - 100% range.
>>> 
>>> I don't know what caused this, but it's not, in my view, an output
>>> that
>>> efficiently utilizes the grayscale file information.
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> www.PaulRoark.com
>>

For what it's worth, here are the areas I would like to understand a bit
more on this stuff.  Some of these things hark back to core subjects like to
what should we linearise etc.  I feel like I am quite close to getting to a
level of understanding I would be happy with but I haven't closed the last
few loops.  Any help appreciated.

1.  I'd like to understand better the relationship between L* and XYZ_Y.  I
have trouble thinking in cubed roots!  I thought for a minute that XYZ_Y
followed the shape of the human perceived luminance curve but a couple of
sample observations show that's not the case.  I'm sure that with a little
thought I'll get there.

2.  I'd like to better understand the actual implementation of the BPC and
white point scaling, ie understand specifically rather than generically how
it is implemented.  We start with, at least with a RIP, printer greyscale
that is linear with respect to L* - how does the scaling actually affect the
shape of this? Both in terms of L* and XYZ_Y. I hope I can take this up with
Roy.

3.  I'd like to understand why linearisation is best done with respect to L*
and not XYZ_Y which is where the scaling is done.  This obviously requires
the first item to be understood.  I would guess it has something to do with
the linearity of L* as a concept and ease of interpolation but then on that
I am just guessing.

While Roy and Carl spotted the issue with Paul's tests, Paul will still find
that there is greyscale compression (as measured by L*) in the final result.
Remember that when we have the opportunity to do so, we linearise the L*
output of the printer prior to slotting in an ICC profile (which has BPC and
wtpt scaling).  The raw linearised L* output has good L* separation but is
flat and lifeless and we can readily see why from a quick sketch - the gamma
or contrast of the output is significantly less than "ideal".  If we are
going to restore this contrast into something visually appealing then
something's got to give so think either a handmade contrast s-curve or a
luminance-calculated ICC profile.  We readily recognise that the former
compresses luminance change at either end in order to restore contrast
through the important mid-tones.  Exactly what happens with an ICC profile
requires an understanding of my second point above.

One final comment:  what we are talking about here is gamut compression (and
as a result how contrast is affected):  how to compress a range from perfect
black to perfect white in the image file onto a piece of paper that is
certainly imperfect at both ends and more often than not a lot worse at the
black end than the white end.  In B&W the problem is simplified to a
discussion of black point and white point.  We don't have to worry about
other out-of-gamut colours because if we tackle these two then all else
falls into line even with intentionally non-neutral prints.  The points
Bruce Fraser (Real World Color Management pg 74) makes are very important:

"Color management systems use various gamut mapping strategies that let us
reconcile the differing gamuts of our capture, display and output devices,
but it's important to recognize that not only is there no "correct" way to
handle out-of-gamut colors, it's also pretty unlikely that any gamut-mapping
strategy, or any automatic method of compressing tone and color, will do
justice to all images.  So color management doesn't remove the need for
color correction, or the need for skilled humans to make the necessary
decisions about color reproduction.  As we've said before, perception of
color is uniquely human, and its judgement is decidedly human as well.  What
color management does do is to let us view color accurately and communicate
it unambiguously, so that we have a sound basis on which to make these
judgements."

We have rejected the full implementation of colour management because of
colour shifts and "metamerism" (a slightly misused term) - if it worked we'd
all be happily printing just like the colour guys.  What Roy has achieved
for us, and it is still a work in progress, is to allow us to take the
component of colour management most important to us - the achromatic
component (brightness) - and use it while leaving the the chromatic
components (hue and saturation) alone.  We manage the latter when we pick
the inks that make up our greyscale and choose our paper - we do not attempt
to have colour management help us with these.  So we have the core of a
technique that is very very broadly deployed in the colour world at our
disposal.  But that still does not obviate the need for human judgement as
to the effectiveness of its implementation.  In "auto mode" it does work
very well but there will of course be situations when it needs a tweak, most
likely with a PS curve.  The good thing is that if colour management is
deployed effectively throughout your workflow then you can preview the
effect of colour management with _reasonable_ confidence, make your own
judgements as to its case-by-case applicability and make corrections if you
deem necessary.

Steve Kale wrote:

> 3.  I'd like to understand why linearisation is best done with respect to L*
> and not XYZ_Y which is where the scaling is done.  This obviously requires
> the first item to be understood.  I would guess it has something to do with
> the linearity of L* as a concept and ease of interpolation but then on that
> I am just guessing.

I find something along those lines intriguing as well. We have 
discussed the Epson Colorbase calibration/linearisation. Jon 
Cone's curves/profiles for K7 and QTR have been discussed. For 
some time I wonder whether a linearisation in the strict sense 
of what is done in RIPs is actually used by both Epson and 
Jon. Is there something gained by keeping the natural dotgain 
curves etc of the Epson printers and build the curves or the 
perceptual right on them instead of linearising the printers 
first and then applying the perceptual curves/profiles ? 
Calibrating the printers to a standard still could respect 
that natural behaviour while it could also address the issues 
that do not deliver a better result.  But that doesn't make it 
a linearisation.

In RIPs there are choices that work at the level of 
linearisation like ink limiting and the CMY split etc. So I 
can understand that there's an extra level added based on a 
straight model. It still may be easier in color mixing control 
than any other model, in quad printing things are quite 
different though. In QTR linerisation is available too but 
there are ways like adapting the target values to get more a 
kind of a calibration than a strict linearisation. I might be 
far off-course but I have always wondered how Epson does it in 
the driver and Jon's messages made me curious too.

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, I've found
QTR Create ICC 3.2.1 does not always work with un-even increments.  On the
other hand, if there are 1% increments from 100 - 95%, then 5% to 75% and
then 10% steps on the rest of the scale, the print is about the same as if
there are 5% increments all the way.  In both cases there are steps in the
95 - 100% where the "lighter" input step is printed darker than the adjacent
"darker" input step.  On the other hand, they are all so close that this
"posterization" could be random printing artifacts and X-Rite reading
errors, and there is no visible separation or "posterization."  

Of more relevance, I'm not generating enough 95% - 100% separation with the
Create ICC approach to have visual separation in that region.  For example,
looking just at the case where the input text file has 5% steps over the
entire scale, the 100% - 95% separation or difference is Lab L 0.46.  This
is with the C86 and MIS EZ inks on EEM.  (PS CS2, Print with Preview, Let PS
Determine Colors, Perceptual, and Black Point Compensation on)  The driver
with no ICC loaded has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.39, with every 1% step
being measurably separated.  For comparison, the 2400 with Eboni loaded, in
the ABW mode with neutral and normal tone settings (and no ICC loaded in the
PwP) has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.30.

The gammas generated by these printing approaches is different, and that, of
course, would have some effect on the 100% - 95% separation.  Looking at the
50% density as a relative measure of gamma, the 2400 (EEM, ABW, neutral,
normal tone) and C86 EZ (Epson Color Controls gamma 2.2, Contrast -10) have
essentially the same L 58 50% density.  The C86 with the ICC has a 50%
density of L 54.

My main concern is that a visually un-separated 95 - 100% "wastes" limited
grayscale by essentially clipping the darkest 5%.  It is true, of course,
that with 16 bit files this is much more tolerable than is was with 8 bits
and a barely sufficient 256 total steps.

I have noticed that Epson drivers in printers aimed only at the color market
often if not typically clipped the darkest 5% also, as did some samples of
B&W output that were printed by Image Print on a 9600. 

Additionally, without a custom dot gain curve, my monitor (profiled with
SpyderPro 2) also has no visual 100% - 95% separation.  However, I'd thought
in an earlier thread many said that they do have such separation.  So, I'd
assumed my modestly priced CRT and video board were largely responsible for
the lack of deep shadow separation.  

On LCD displays I have on other computers in my house, still modestly
priced, the 95% - 100% steps are separated.  

In short, my "wasting grayscale" concerns aside, the ICC approach I'm
getting -- i.e., clipped darkest 5% -- matches my old CRT monitor quite
well.

On the other hand, the 2400 ABW and C86 prints (close to the old standards
I'd used from the Piezo days forward) match my LCDs better.  If matching the
monitor is the issue, I'm not sure matching an older CRT is a worthwhile
goal.  I suspect LCDs more like my newer, entry level Princeton displays are
more typical of the larger market I'm most interested in facilitating.

What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are others
seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:00:15 -0700
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, I've found
> QTR Create ICC 3.2.1 does not always work with un-even increments.  On the
> other hand, if there are 1% increments from 100 - 95%, then 5% to 75% and
> then 10% steps on the rest of the scale, the print is about the same as if
> there are 5% increments all the way.  In both cases there are steps in the
> 95 - 100% where the "lighter" input step is printed darker than the adjacent
> "darker" input step.  On the other hand, they are all so close that this
> "posterization" could be random printing artifacts and X-Rite reading
> errors, and there is no visible separation or "posterization."
> 
> Of more relevance, I'm not generating enough 95% - 100% separation with the
> Create ICC approach to have visual separation in that region.  For example,
> looking just at the case where the input text file has 5% steps over the
> entire scale, the 100% - 95% separation or difference is Lab L 0.46.  This
> is with the C86 and MIS EZ inks on EEM.  (PS CS2, Print with Preview, Let PS
> Determine Colors, Perceptual, and Black Point Compensation on)  The driver
> with no ICC loaded has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.39, with every 1% step
> being measurably separated.  For comparison, the 2400 with Eboni loaded, in
> the ABW mode with neutral and normal tone settings (and no ICC loaded in the
> PwP) has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.30.

You should compare separation not with Epson ABW but with an Epson colour
managed print.  The Adv B&W print is the equivalent of a linearised but not
profiled print.  Epson ABW is missing this management and that's why using
QTR Create ICC can fill the gap in Epson ABW workflow.  That's not to say
the luminance managed approach is for you but it puts you on an even keel
with the colour community.


> 
> The gammas generated by these printing approaches is different, and that, of
> course, would have some effect on the 100% - 95% separation.  Looking at the
> 50% density as a relative measure of gamma, the 2400 (EEM, ABW, neutral,
> normal tone) and C86 EZ (Epson Color Controls gamma 2.2, Contrast -10) have
> essentially the same L 58 50% density.  The C86 with the ICC has a 50%
> density of L 54.

More where you'd expect it.
> 
> My main concern is that a visually un-separated 95 - 100% "wastes" limited
> grayscale by essentially clipping the darkest 5%.  It is true, of course,
> that with 16 bit files this is much more tolerable than is was with 8 bits
> and a barely sufficient 256 total steps.
> 
> I have noticed that Epson drivers in printers aimed only at the color market
> often if not typically clipped the darkest 5% also, as did some samples of
> B&W output that were printed by Image Print on a 9600.
> 
> Additionally, without a custom dot gain curve, my monitor (profiled with
> SpyderPro 2) also has no visual 100% - 95% separation.  However, I'd thought
> in an earlier thread many said that they do have such separation.  So, I'd
> assumed my modestly priced CRT and video board were largely responsible for
> the lack of deep shadow separation.
> 
> On LCD displays I have on other computers in my house, still modestly
> priced, the 95% - 100% steps are separated.
> 
> In short, my "wasting grayscale" concerns aside, the ICC approach I'm
> getting -- i.e., clipped darkest 5% -- matches my old CRT monitor quite
> well.
> 
> On the other hand, the 2400 ABW and C86 prints (close to the old standards
> I'd used from the Piezo days forward) match my LCDs better.  If matching the
> monitor is the issue, I'm not sure matching an older CRT is a worthwhile
> goal.  I suspect LCDs more like my newer, entry level Princeton displays are
> more typical of the larger market I'm most interested in facilitating.
> 
> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are others
> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
> 
>
I'll post some test results when I switch over to MK ink.

Because of Paul's concerns I printed out two targets yesterday 
(drying you know) of a linear 51 step target on HPR, one unmanaged, 
the other through the ICC profile I created for the paper.  Both, 
however, were printed through the ABW driver ("neutral"). I'll have 
time later today to read the 94-100 patches and I'll post the numbers.

As for matching the monitor, isn't that the whole thing?  If the 
blacks are clipped on the monitor, you open them up in PS.  My Sony 
LCD clearly shows separation in the 90-100 area, calibrated to 2.2 
and 5K and with a luminance level of only 40 cdm2.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> > From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:00:15 -0700
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the 
flat
> > 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, 
I've found
> > QTR Create ICC 3.2.1 does not always work with un-even 
increments.  On the
> > other hand, if there are 1% increments from 100 - 95%, then 5% to 
75% and
> > then 10% steps on the rest of the scale, the print is about the 
same as if
> > there are 5% increments all the way.  In both cases there are 
steps in the
> > 95 - 100% where the "lighter" input step is printed darker than 
the adjacent
> > "darker" input step.  On the other hand, they are all so close 
that this
> > "posterization" could be random printing artifacts and X-Rite 
reading
> > errors, and there is no visible separation or "posterization."
> > 
> > Of more relevance, I'm not generating enough 95% - 100% 
separation with the
> > Create ICC approach to have visual separation in that region.  
For example,
> > looking just at the case where the input text file has 5% steps 
over the
> > entire scale, the 100% - 95% separation or difference is Lab L 
0.46.  This
> > is with the C86 and MIS EZ inks on EEM.  (PS CS2, Print with 
Preview, Let PS
> > Determine Colors, Perceptual, and Black Point Compensation on)  
The driver
> > with no ICC loaded has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.39, with 
every 1% step
> > being measurably separated.  For comparison, the 2400 with Eboni 
loaded, in
> > the ABW mode with neutral and normal tone settings (and no ICC 
loaded in the
> > PwP) has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.30.
> 
> You should compare separation not with Epson ABW but with an Epson 
colour
> managed print.  The Adv B&W print is the equivalent of a linearised 
but not
> profiled print.  Epson ABW is missing this management and that's 
why using
> QTR Create ICC can fill the gap in Epson ABW workflow.  That's not 
to say
> the luminance managed approach is for you but it puts you on an 
even keel
> with the colour community.
> 
> 
> > 
> > The gammas generated by these printing approaches is different, 
and that, of
> > course, would have some effect on the 100% - 95% separation.  
Looking at the
> > 50% density as a relative measure of gamma, the 2400 (EEM, ABW, 
neutral,
> > normal tone) and C86 EZ (Epson Color Controls gamma 2.2, 
Contrast -10) have
> > essentially the same L 58 50% density.  The C86 with the ICC has 
a 50%
> > density of L 54.
> 
> More where you'd expect it.
> > 
> > My main concern is that a visually un-separated 95 - 
100% "wastes" limited
> > grayscale by essentially clipping the darkest 5%.  It is true, of 
course,
> > that with 16 bit files this is much more tolerable than is was 
with 8 bits
> > and a barely sufficient 256 total steps.
> > 
> > I have noticed that Epson drivers in printers aimed only at the 
color market
> > often if not typically clipped the darkest 5% also, as did some 
samples of
> > B&W output that were printed by Image Print on a 9600.
> > 
> > Additionally, without a custom dot gain curve, my monitor 
(profiled with
> > SpyderPro 2) also has no visual 100% - 95% separation.  However, 
I'd thought
> > in an earlier thread many said that they do have such 
separation.  So, I'd
> > assumed my modestly priced CRT and video board were largely 
responsible for
> > the lack of deep shadow separation.
> > 
> > On LCD displays I have on other computers in my house, still 
modestly
> > priced, the 95% - 100% steps are separated.
> > 
> > In short, my "wasting grayscale" concerns aside, the ICC approach 
I'm
> > getting -- i.e., clipped darkest 5% -- matches my old CRT monitor 
quite
> > well.
> > 
> > On the other hand, the 2400 ABW and C86 prints (close to the old 
standards
> > I'd used from the Piezo days forward) match my LCDs better.  If 
matching the
> > monitor is the issue, I'm not sure matching an older CRT is a 
worthwhile
> > goal.  I suspect LCDs more like my newer, entry level Princeton 
displays are
> > more typical of the larger market I'm most interested in 
facilitating.
> > 
> > What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are 
others

> > seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
> > 
> >
> I'll post some test results when I switch over to MK ink.
>

Here is a scan of my 51 step target printed to by Epson Adv B&W Cool-Darker
to EPSG paper with my corresponding QTR-Create-ICC profile:

(sorry for the formatting but I think you can scan through it)
  
 SampleID SAMPLE_NAME GRAY LAB_L LAB_A LAB_B
 21 G3 100 3.03 0.05 -0.6
 19 G1 98 3.28 0.05 -0.6
 17 F2 96 3.63 0.04 -0.46
 15 E3 94 4.18 0.02 -0.23
 13 E1 92 5.41 -0.19 0.1
 11 D2 90 8.06 -0.28 0.3
 9 C3 88 9.76 -0.23 0.47
 7 C1 86 11.83 -0.22 0.65
 5 B2 84 14.53 -0.19 0.64
 3 A3 82 16.94 -0.13 0.49
 1 A1 80 18.91 -0.09 0.55
 50 Q2 78 21.38 -0.02 0.48
 48 P3 76 23.75 -0.13 0.49
 46 P1 74 25.57 -0.24 0.4
 44 O2 72 28.14 -0.16 0.13
 42 N3 70 30.39 -0.15 0.11
 40 N1 68 32.41 -0.08 -0.1
 38 M2 66 34.68 0.02 -0.4
 36 L3 64 36.9 0.03 -0.51
 34 L1 62 38.78 0.07 -0.43
 32 K2 60 40.98 0.17 -0.59
 30 J3 58 43.13 0.08 -0.9
 28 J1 56 44.96 0.1 -0.85
 26 I2 54 47.03 0.05 -0.89
 24 H3 52 49.02 -0.08 -0.83
 22 H1 50 50.82 -0.13 -0.85
 20 G2 48 52.78 -0.14 -0.82
 18 F3 46 54.74 -0.15 -1.09
 16 F1 44 56.55 -0.07 -1.05
 14 E2 42 58.46 -0.15 -1.17
 12 D3 40 60.12 -0.17 -1.27
 10 D1 38 62.03 -0.14 -1.36
 8 C2 36 63.95 -0.18 -1.57
 6 B3 34 65.6 -0.17 -1.85
 4 B1 32 67.44 -0.26 -1.79
 2 A2 30 69.31 -0.31 -2.02
 51 Q3 28 70.89 -0.28 -1.99
 49 Q1 26 72.86 0 -2.06
 47 P2 24 74.32 0 -1.9
 45 O3 22 76.13 -0.09 -1.85
 43 O1 20 77.86 -0.18 -1.71
 41 N2 18 79.54 -0.42 -1.96
 39 M3 16 81.35 -0.78 -2.61
 37 M1 14 83.27 -0.81 -3.01
 35 L2 12 84.69 -0.73 -3.31
 33 K3 10 86.6 -0.65 -3.66
 31 K1 8 88.18 -0.56 -3.61
 29 J2 6 89.83 -0.5 -3.7
 27 I3 4 91.46 -0.54 -3.85
 25 I1 2 93.14 -0.55 -4.03
 23 H2 0 94.81 -0.61 -3.89

Here is the data from Adv B&W without the profile:

  
 SampleID SAMPLE_NAME GRAY LAB_L LAB_A LAB_B
 21 G3 100 3.33 -0.04 -0.57
 19 G1 98 3.83 -0.04 -0.53
 17 F2 96 5.08 -0.2 -0.34
 15 E3 94 6.32 -0.21 -0.32
 13 E1 92 7.81 -0.44 -0.43
 11 D2 90 9.91 -0.48 -0.48
 9 C3 88 11.39 -0.46 -0.67
 7 C1 86 12.85 -0.51 -0.42
 5 B2 84 14.93 -0.43 -0.92
 3 A3 82 16.4 -0.48 -1.23
 1 A1 80 17.83 -0.49 -1.07
 50 Q2 78 20.32 -0.6 -1.35
 48 P3 76 22.62 -0.64 -1.67
 46 P1 74 24.46 -0.68 -1.42
 44 O2 72 27.21 -0.76 -1.86
 42 N3 70 29.43 -0.61 -2.29
 40 N1 68 31.3 -0.61 -2.25
 38 M2 66 33.7 -0.59 -2.69
 36 L3 64 35.86 -0.55 -2.94
 34 L1 62 37.74 -0.52 -2.91
 32 K2 60 39.99 -0.48 -3.15
 30 J3 58 41.84 -0.43 -3.39
 28 J1 56 43.61 -0.43 -3.41
 26 I2 54 45.99 -0.52 -3.41
 24 H3 52 47.92 -0.6 -3.57
 22 H1 50 49.59 -0.61 -3.3
 20 G2 48 51.35 -0.76 -3.51
 18 F3 46 53.18 -0.59 -3.71
 16 F1 44 54.81 -0.6 -3.6
 14 E2 42 56.72 -0.67 -3.7
 12 D3 40 58.33 -0.58 -3.67
 10 D1 38 60.22 -0.54 -3.91
 8 C2 36 62.16 -0.61 -4.09
 6 B3 34 63.9 -0.56 -4.11
 4 B1 32 65.7 -0.62 -4.18
 2 A2 30 67.33 -0.55 -4.17
 51 Q3 28 69.42 -0.55 -4.1
 49 Q1 26 71.39 -0.3 -4.1
 47 P2 24 73.38 -0.21 -3.69
 45 O3 22 75.31 -0.32 -3.43
 43 O1 20 77.45 -0.5 -3.49
 41 N2 18 79.54 -0.8 -3.74
 39 M3 16 81.01 -0.93 -3.91
 37 M1 14 82.59 -0.98 -4.27
 35 L2 12 84.03 -0.8 -4.4
 33 K3 10 85.58 -0.7 -4.22
 31 K1 8 87.47 -0.55 -4.25
 29 J2 6 89.3 -0.49 -4.18
 27 I3 4 91.17 -0.52 -4.08
 25 I1 2 93.09 -0.52 -4.17
 23 H2 0 94.96 -0.57 -4.26

Clearly they have been read at different dry off times and were printed with
a different ink batch (look at the dMax difference) but I think you can get
a sense for what the BPC is doing....

They are not clipped on your monitor.  Adobe CMM maps to the monitor black
point and performs BPC.  Again, to get from a big gamut to a smaller one you
must either compress or clip.  Absolute colormetric clips.
Relcol/perceptual with BPC does not.  Without BPC it would.  Check your PS
color settings - although I think I heard once that these settings do not
affect PCS to display conversions which are always set to relcol and bpc.

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:39:07 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Because of Paul's concerns I printed out two targets yesterday
> (drying you know) of a linear 51 step target on HPR, one unmanaged,
> the other through the ICC profile I created for the paper.  Both,
> however, were printed through the ABW driver ("neutral"). I'll have
> time later today to read the 94-100 patches and I'll post the numbers.
> 
> As for matching the monitor, isn't that the whole thing?  If the
> blacks are clipped on the monitor, you open them up in PS.  My Sony
> LCD clearly shows separation in the 90-100 area, calibrated to 2.2
> and 5K and with a luminance level of only 40 cdm2.

What's the lowest black your monitor can display?

Paul,

I just measured a 100-95% Lab L difference of 0.77 using a 2400 (MK)  
ABW, neutral, default settings printed on Hahnemuhle PR BW without an  
icc profile (no color management) versus 2.18 with a create-icc  
profile in PwP print space (perceptual, BPC checked).

Carl

On Oct 20, 2005, at 1:00 PM, Paul Roark wrote:

> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted,  
> I've found
> QTR Create ICC 3.2.1 does not always work with un-even increments.   
> On the
> other hand, if there are 1% increments from 100 - 95%, then 5% to  
> 75% and
> then 10% steps on the rest of the scale, the print is about the  
> same as if
> there are 5% increments all the way.  In both cases there are steps  
> in the
> 95 - 100% where the "lighter" input step is printed darker than the  
> adjacent
> "darker" input step.  On the other hand, they are all so close that  
> this
> "posterization" could be random printing artifacts and X-Rite reading
> errors, and there is no visible separation or "posterization."
>
> Of more relevance, I'm not generating enough 95% - 100% separation  
> with the
> Create ICC approach to have visual separation in that region.  For  
> example,
> looking just at the case where the input text file has 5% steps  
> over the
> entire scale, the 100% - 95% separation or difference is Lab L  
> 0.46.  This
> is with the C86 and MIS EZ inks on EEM.  (PS CS2, Print with  
> Preview, Let PS
> Determine Colors, Perceptual, and Black Point Compensation on)  The  
> driver
> with no ICC loaded has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.39, with  
> every 1% step
> being measurably separated.  For comparison, the 2400 with Eboni  
> loaded, in
> the ABW mode with neutral and normal tone settings (and no ICC  
> loaded in the
> PwP) has a 100% - 95% separation of L 2.30.
>
> The gammas generated by these printing approaches is different, and  
> that, of
> course, would have some effect on the 100% - 95% separation.   
> Looking at the
> 50% density as a relative measure of gamma, the 2400 (EEM, ABW,  
> neutral,
> normal tone) and C86 EZ (Epson Color Controls gamma 2.2, Contrast  
> -10) have
> essentially the same L 58 50% density.  The C86 with the ICC has a 50%
> density of L 54.
>
> My main concern is that a visually un-separated 95 - 100% "wastes"  
> limited
> grayscale by essentially clipping the darkest 5%.  It is true, of  
> course,
> that with 16 bit files this is much more tolerable than is was with  
> 8 bits
> and a barely sufficient 256 total steps.
>
> I have noticed that Epson drivers in printers aimed only at the  
> color market
> often if not typically clipped the darkest 5% also, as did some  
> samples of
> B&W output that were printed by Image Print on a 9600.
>
> Additionally, without a custom dot gain curve, my monitor (profiled  
> with
> SpyderPro 2) also has no visual 100% - 95% separation.  However,  
> I'd thought
> in an earlier thread many said that they do have such separation.   
> So, I'd
> assumed my modestly priced CRT and video board were largely  
> responsible for
> the lack of deep shadow separation.
>
> On LCD displays I have on other computers in my house, still modestly
> priced, the 95% - 100% steps are separated.
>
> In short, my "wasting grayscale" concerns aside, the ICC approach I'm
> getting -- i.e., clipped darkest 5% -- matches my old CRT monitor  
> quite
> well.
>
> On the other hand, the 2400 ABW and C86 prints (close to the old  
> standards
> I'd used from the Piezo days forward) match my LCDs better.  If  
> matching the
> monitor is the issue, I'm not sure matching an older CRT is a  
> worthwhile
> goal.  I suspect LCDs more like my newer, entry level Princeton  
> displays are
> more typical of the larger market I'm most interested in facilitating.
>
> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are  
> others
> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I'll do the same test tomorrow on my 4800.  Those don't make sense to me
except that the ICC profile may be correcting for the poor initial linearity
of the 2400.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 14:49:45 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Paul,
> 
> I just measured a 100-95% Lab L difference of 0.77 using a 2400 (MK)
> ABW, neutral, default settings printed on Hahnemuhle PR BW without an
> icc profile (no color management) versus 2.18 with a create-icc
> profile in PwP print space (perceptual, BPC checked).
> 
> Carl

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, here are the areas I would like to understand a bit
> more on this stuff.  Some of these things hark back to core subjects like to
> what should we linearise etc.  I feel like I am quite close to getting to a
> level of understanding I would be happy with but I haven't closed the last
> few loops.  Any help appreciated.
> 
> 1.  I'd like to understand better the relationship between L* and XYZ_Y.  I
> have trouble thinking in cubed roots!  I thought for a minute that XYZ_Y
> followed the shape of the human perceived luminance curve but a couple of
> sample observations show that's not the case.  I'm sure that with a little
> thought I'll get there.
> 
> 2.  I'd like to better understand the actual implementation of the BPC and
> white point scaling, ie understand specifically rather than generically how
> it is implemented.  We start with, at least with a RIP, printer greyscale
> that is linear with respect to L* - how does the scaling actually affect the
> shape of this? Both in terms of L* and XYZ_Y. I hope I can take this up with
> Roy.
> 
> 3.  I'd like to understand why linearisation is best done with respect to L*
> and not XYZ_Y which is where the scaling is done.  This obviously requires
> the first item to be understood.  I would guess it has something to do with
> the linearity of L* as a concept and ease of interpolation but then on that
> I am just guessing.
> 

Linearization and scaling are pretty different issues.  I think there are good 
reasons for thinking in different units for each.  An example may help to
see the issues.

----------------

Scaling with respect to Y (and X and Z too) is probably one of the most basic 
operations.  If you consider how we see the scaling wrt Y happens all the
time.  Y is a measure of how much light or how many photons are reflected
from a surface.  Y=1 means every photon is reflected, Y=0 means no photons
are reflected and Y=0.5 half the photons are reflected.  Imagine a piece of
white paper (idealized Y=1) with a gray patch (Y=0.5).  That's a one-stop
density -- half the light is absorbed.

You look at the paper under a light, your eye is recording the photons being
reflected from the two areas of the paper.  We perceive half the photons from the
patch and call it gray.  Now move the paper closer to the light.  More photons
hit the paper and more are reflected.  In fact if 20% more hit the paper, 20%
more are reflected from all the areas.  But the relationship of the white to the
gray is still the same -- half the protons hitting the gray are absorbed.

What's really happening here?  Our eyes are seeing more photons but are
automatically scaling everything wrt to the illumination or the brightest white.
Put on some sunglasses, this reduces the number of photons again by some
percentage.  Have the iris of the eye or the aperture of a lens vary.   Again
we are linearly scaling the absolute number of photons but the relative 
relationships are remain the same.  Linear scaling of photons is exactly the
same math as linear scaling of Y.   A piece of paper with Y=0.8 and Y=0.4
with more illumination will reflect exactly the same number of photons as the
paper with Y=1 and Y=0.5.   Of course you'd need to make sure the eyes and
brain had no other points of reference about the more illumination.

This is all more of a plausibility argument than proof but I think it shows a
way to think about this that is easier to grasp.

------------------

Linearization on the other hand is a more arbitrary issue and more of a
implementation detail.  With just 256 possible gray values in a 8 bit file it
makes sense to be careful to use them is the most efficient way.  Since we
specifically care about "seeing" images making the 256 values separated
according to human perception makes sense.  The L* function was designed
for linear perception.  Exponential functions such as gamma do a pretty
good job too and historically have been used a lot since they are mathematically
simpler, but with computers that's a non-issue.

There's also one other side effect of using L* that is a potential benefit.  When
we measure a stepwedge and get series of Lab values, what about the values
between patches?  Say we have measurements for 50 and 55, what would
51,52,53,54 be?   Linear interpolation is the easiest and most straigthtforward
method and is also the best method if L* linearization is used.

-------------------

Black Point Compensation (BPC) is a bit more vague in my mind.  It is not a
feature of ICC profiles per se -- not mentioned at all.  The only document
is the Adobe bpc paper.   It clearly uses the Y = DECODE(L) function for scaling
but it is a little vague on the details.  I've used this to mimic (sort of) the approach
taken at the white end but this doesn't jive with the Y scaling arguments above.
This falls into the perceptual rendering of ICC which is specially stated as 
implementation dependent.  But the good news seems to be that we're all
doing it the same way.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, I've found

...

> 
> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are others
> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

There's been a lot of talk about the 95 to 100 range and what separation can be
and ought to be seen there.

The one thing that I haven't seen emphasized is the issue of what grayspace
people are using.    100 is always dMax but where 95 falls is dependent on
what grayscale people are using.   Most often the default grayspace that is used
is GG 2.2.   This defines a very dark 95 step.  Put the eye dropper on it and
100 to 95 is L=0 to L=1 a very much lower slope than most of the range.  This is
a definition issue not a matter of any calibration or device quality.   This small
step is often visible with a nicely calibrated monitor but on a matte print the
difference is very small.   Without CMM this can be fudged but as the measurements
get more precise I think this is a builtin side effect.

This is one of the main reasons I create the Gray Lab space.  With this space
100 to 95 shows as L=0 to L=5  -- 5 times the slope.  Note that the only thing
different is the grayspace used -- you make and use the ICC profiles identically.

Roy

My data is from 51 step linear targets printed on HPR and the ABW 
Neutral.  The numbers are for 94, 96, 98 and 100 blacks.  As Roy 
suggested, I am using G2.2 as the working space.  

Screen (info palette): 2, 1, 1, 0
No color Management:  16.9, 16.7, 16.7, 16.7
ICC Workflow:  17.7, 17.1, 17.1, 17.2 (sic)

I repeated the readings several times and took a reading from a light 
patch between each reading.




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
<roy@h...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> >
> > I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the 
flat
> > 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, 
I've found
> 
> ...
> 
> > 
> > What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are 
others
> > seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
> 
> There's been a lot of talk about the 95 to 100 range and what 
separation can be
> and ought to be seen there.
> 
> The one thing that I haven't seen emphasized is the issue of what 
grayspace
> people are using.    100 is always dMax but where 95 falls is 
dependent on
> what grayscale people are using.   Most often the default grayspace 
that is used
> is GG 2.2.   This defines a very dark 95 step.  Put the eye dropper 
on it and
> 100 to 95 is L=0 to L=1 a very much lower slope than most of the 
range.  This is
> a definition issue not a matter of any calibration or device 
quality.   This small
> step is often visible with a nicely calibrated monitor but on a 
matte print the
> difference is very small.   Without CMM this can be fudged but as 
the measurements
> get more precise I think this is a builtin side effect.
> 
> This is one of the main reasons I create the Gray Lab space.  With 
this space
> 100 to 95 shows as L=0 to L=5  -- 5 times the slope.  Note that the 
only thing
> different is the grayspace used -- you make and use the ICC 
profiles identically.

> 
> Roy
>

Roy,

Good point.  I've been doing all of my work in QTR gray lab work  
space, but I wasn't aware of the 95-100 difference compared to gamma  
2.2.  Does this mean that if I make and icc profile using my QTR gray  
lab working space someone else using gamma 2.2 work space will  
experience a different result if they apply the same profile for  
printing or softproofing?

Carl

On Oct 20, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Roy Harrington wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
>>
>> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
>> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted,  
>> I've found
>>
>
> ...
>
>
>>
>> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are  
>> others
>> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
>>
>> Paul
>> www.PaulRoark.com
>>
>>
>
> There's been a lot of talk about the 95 to 100 range and what  
> separation can be
> and ought to be seen there.
>
> The one thing that I haven't seen emphasized is the issue of what  
> grayspace
> people are using.    100 is always dMax but where 95 falls is  
> dependent on
> what grayscale people are using.   Most often the default grayspace  
> that is used
> is GG 2.2.   This defines a very dark 95 step.  Put the eye dropper  
> on it and
> 100 to 95 is L=0 to L=1 a very much lower slope than most of the  
> range.  This is
> a definition issue not a matter of any calibration or device  
> quality.   This small
> step is often visible with a nicely calibrated monitor but on a  
> matte print the
> difference is very small.   Without CMM this can be fudged but as  
> the measurements
> get more precise I think this is a builtin side effect.
>
> This is one of the main reasons I create the Gray Lab space.  With  
> this space
> 100 to 95 shows as L=0 to L=5  -- 5 times the slope.  Note that the  
> only thing
> different is the grayspace used -- you make and use the ICC  
> profiles identically.
>
> Roy



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

But the L* separation of Lab vs GG 2.2 is an illusion created by sample.
Convert between the two and your colours remain the same.  So if you are
looking at a 51 step wedge on your display in GG 2.2 then the 90% K patch
reads L* 6.  Convert to Lab and the same patch's colour doesn't change at
all and it's L* is still 6.  Convert to GG 1.8 and yes 90% grey is now 94%
grey but the color is the same and it is still L* 6.  Another way to put
this is that the visual separation you see does not change as you convert
between workspaces.  If your printer could reproduce all the shades of grey
you see on screen then that patch will look the same in print and read the
same when you measure it.  It doesn't matter which space you work in (at
least for B&W - there are other complications for colour).  When you convert
to the printer output profile (you do not assign a printer profile) your
colours will map the same. The only issue is the handling of out-of-gamut
colours and its influence (if any) depending on intent of in-gamut colours.

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:30:04 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>> 
>> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
>> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, I've found
> 
> ...
> 
>> 
>> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are others
>> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
>> 
>> Paul
>> www.PaulRoark.com
>> 
> 
> There's been a lot of talk about the 95 to 100 range and what separation can
> be
> and ought to be seen there.
> 
> The one thing that I haven't seen emphasized is the issue of what grayspace
> people are using.    100 is always dMax but where 95 falls is dependent on
> what grayscale people are using.   Most often the default grayspace that is
> used
> is GG 2.2.   This defines a very dark 95 step.  Put the eye dropper on it and
> 100 to 95 is L=0 to L=1 a very much lower slope than most of the range.  This
> is
> a definition issue not a matter of any calibration or device quality.   This
> small
> step is often visible with a nicely calibrated monitor but on a matte print
> the
> difference is very small.   Without CMM this can be fudged but as the
> measurements
> get more precise I think this is a builtin side effect.
> 
> This is one of the main reasons I create the Gray Lab space.  With this space
> 100 to 95 shows as L=0 to L=5  -- 5 times the slope.  Note that the only thing
> different is the grayspace used -- you make and use the ICC profiles
> identically.
> 
> Roy

Sorry, it would of course affect those prints that do not utilise a printer
ICC profile.  In that case different raw pixel values are sent to the
printer depending on the workspace.  This is a big advantage of the ICC
profile workflow - it is workspace independent because a conversion is done
at print.  

So workspace does have relevance when making the with ICC/without ICC
comparisons.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:34:53 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> But the L* separation of Lab vs GG 2.2 is an illusion created by sample.
> Convert between the two and your colours remain the same.  So if you are
> looking at a 51 step wedge on your display in GG 2.2 then the 90% K patch
> reads L* 6.  Convert to Lab and the same patch's colour doesn't change at
> all and it's L* is still 6.  Convert to GG 1.8 and yes 90% grey is now 94%
> grey but the color is the same and it is still L* 6.  Another way to put
> this is that the visual separation you see does not change as you convert
> between workspaces.  If your printer could reproduce all the shades of grey
> you see on screen then that patch will look the same in print and read the
> same when you measure it.  It doesn't matter which space you work in (at
> least for B&W - there are other complications for colour).  When you convert
> to the printer output profile (you do not assign a printer profile) your
> colours will map the same. The only issue is the handling of out-of-gamut
> colours and its influence (if any) depending on intent of in-gamut colours.
>

Carl,

When you make the icc profile you should be printing the target with No Color 
Management so it doesn't matter what the file working space is.   So the icc 
profile is not tied to that working space at all --- it's usable by anyone.

But, notice that if they are using a different working space the conversions that
happen are different.   Example: if you have a 21step as Gray Lab, print it.  Now
Assign to GG 2.2 what you see on the screen is different, now print again, what you
see on the print has those same changes in look.  The print matches the screen.

If however you Convert to GG 2.2  (the numbers in the file change -- don't save
this modified 21step -- its not really a 21step any more),  what you see on the
screen does not change.  It still matches the original Gray Lab version.  Print it
and the print still matches the original Gray Lab print.  Both cases the the 
print matches the screen.    Also in all cases the soft-proof matches the print.

Color Management is a strange black box but its almost like magic how everything
(at least should) match up.

Roy


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield <scho@m...> 
wrote:

>
> Roy,
> 
> Good point.  I've been doing all of my work in QTR gray lab work  
> space, but I wasn't aware of the 95-100 difference compared to gamma  
> 2.2.  Does this mean that if I make and icc profile using my QTR gray  
> lab working space someone else using gamma 2.2 work space will  
> experience a different result if they apply the same profile for  
> printing or softproofing?
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 20, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Roy Harrington wrote:
> 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
> >> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted,  
> >> I've found
> >>
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> >>
> >> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are  
> >> others
> >> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
> >>
> >> Paul
> >> www.PaulRoark.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> > There's been a lot of talk about the 95 to 100 range and what  
> > separation can be
> > and ought to be seen there.
> >
> > The one thing that I haven't seen emphasized is the issue of what  
> > grayspace
> > people are using.    100 is always dMax but where 95 falls is  
> > dependent on
> > what grayscale people are using.   Most often the default grayspace  
> > that is used
> > is GG 2.2.   This defines a very dark 95 step.  Put the eye dropper  
> > on it and
> > 100 to 95 is L=0 to L=1 a very much lower slope than most of the  
> > range.  This is
> > a definition issue not a matter of any calibration or device  
> > quality.   This small
> > step is often visible with a nicely calibrated monitor but on a  
> > matte print the
> > difference is very small.   Without CMM this can be fudged but as  
> > the measurements
> > get more precise I think this is a builtin side effect.
> >
> > This is one of the main reasons I create the Gray Lab space.  With  
> > this space
> > 100 to 95 shows as L=0 to L=5  -- 5 times the slope.  Note that the  
> > only thing
> > different is the grayspace used -- you make and use the ICC  
> > profiles identically.
> >
> > Roy
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Steve,

I think you kind of have this backwards.  All your Converts are changing the
file values.  By Converting you no longer have an even stepwedge.  What you see
with the K and Lab values are the actual values.  K is calculated by (255-gray)/2.55
and L is the actual calculated Luminosity based on the grayscale profile.

BTW, if you are looking at RGB values throughout this exercise they will absolutely
confuse the situation to no end.  You would be seeing another profile conversion to
the working RGB space.  The numbers are fairly removed from what's in the data.

The one feature of PS that shows what's really there is the Histogram.  A stepwedge
should have nice even combs there.

You need to Assign profiles to try the different grayspaces.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

>
> But the L* separation of Lab vs GG 2.2 is an illusion created by sample.
> Convert between the two and your colours remain the same.  So if you are
> looking at a 51 step wedge on your display in GG 2.2 then the 90% K patch
> reads L* 6.  Convert to Lab and the same patch's colour doesn't change at
> all and it's L* is still 6.  Convert to GG 1.8 and yes 90% grey is now 94%
> grey but the color is the same and it is still L* 6.  Another way to put
> this is that the visual separation you see does not change as you convert
> between workspaces.  If your printer could reproduce all the shades of grey
> you see on screen then that patch will look the same in print and read the
> same when you measure it.  It doesn't matter which space you work in (at
> least for B&W - there are other complications for colour).  When you convert
> to the printer output profile (you do not assign a printer profile) your
> colours will map the same. The only issue is the handling of out-of-gamut
> colours and its influence (if any) depending on intent of in-gamut colours.
> 
> 
> > From: Roy Harrington <roy@h...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:30:04 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "Paul Roark"
> > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> >> 
> >> I've printed several samples this morning to further explore the flat
> >> 95-100% print separation issue.  Consistent with what Roy noted, I've found
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> >> 
> >> What kind of 100% - 95% print separation (Lab L differences) are others
> >> seeing with the Create ICC approach?  Is it just my system?
> >> 
> >> Paul
> >> www.PaulRoark.com
> >> 
> > 
> > There's been a lot of talk about the 95 to 100 range and what separation can
> > be
> > and ought to be seen there.
> > 
> > The one thing that I haven't seen emphasized is the issue of what grayspace
> > people are using.    100 is always dMax but where 95 falls is dependent on
> > what grayscale people are using.   Most often the default grayspace that is
> > used
> > is GG 2.2.   This defines a very dark 95 step.  Put the eye dropper on it and
> > 100 to 95 is L=0 to L=1 a very much lower slope than most of the range.  This
> > is
> > a definition issue not a matter of any calibration or device quality.   This
> > small
> > step is often visible with a nicely calibrated monitor but on a matte print
> > the
> > difference is very small.   Without CMM this can be fudged but as the
> > measurements
> > get more precise I think this is a builtin side effect.
> > 
> > This is one of the main reasons I create the Gray Lab space.  With this space
> > 100 to 95 shows as L=0 to L=5  -- 5 times the slope.  Note that the only thing
> > different is the grayspace used -- you make and use the ICC profiles
> > identically.
> > 
> > Roy
>

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:07:46 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I think you kind of have this backwards.

No I think we are just talking across purposes.


>All your Converts are changing the
> file values.  

Correct

>By Converting you no longer have an even stepwedge.

Understood but then you are changing observations.  My point was that the
visual separation of an image doesn't change.  If I work up an image in Gray
Lab or GG2.2 or GG 1.8 and print it with conversion to the print profile
each image will look the same.  So visual separation evident in the image is
NOT dependent on workspace (unlike a Same as Source workflow).

Of course the colour represented by 90% grey in GG 2.2 is not the same
colour as 90% grey in GG 1.8 - that's what is meant by the fact that these
two colour spaces have different gamma.  90% grey in GG 2.2 is the same
colour as 94% grey in GG 1.8.  (It is L* 6 in both cases because it is the
same colour in both cases.)  90% grey in GG 1.8 is a lighter colour than 90%
grey in GG 2.2 - and it will have a different L*.  If you are looking at two
colours in an image (forget their corresponding workspace-dependent file
values for a moment) their separation in print is not altered by workspace
in a colour managed workflow.  So when thinking about what happens to your
image on conversion to a print profile don't be confused about these gamma
differences in workspaces.  In each case the file value sent to the printer
is adjusted by the appropriate amount to render the proper colour.

This is what I meant by an illusion of sample.  If we choose to sample 94%
grey then yes this colour and its "separation" from 100% K moves with
workspace - or more accurately with gamma.  This IS the definition of gamma.
But by so doing we are sampling different colours.  94% only has meaning
when attached to a profile.  When we print an image we do not see a bunch of
numbers on the page but a bunch of colours.  The separation of the print
space is determined by the print space NOT the workspace.

(To emphasise the point, get a step wedge and tag it first with GG 2.2 and
print it with the printer profile, then convert it to 1.8 and print it with
the printer profile.  The prints will look the same regardless of your
workspace.  In each case you are printing different file values and
different observation points on each greyscale but satisfy yourself that you
are printing the same colours.)

It's pedantic point but an important one if you are coming from a Same as
Source workflow where file values are printed without conversion with
respect to the print space.  In that case workspace does matter.  A lot of
people get confused by this stuff.

>What you 
> see
> with the K and Lab values are the actual values.  K is calculated by
> (255-gray)/2.55
> and L is the actual calculated Luminosity based on the grayscale profile.
> 
> BTW, if you are looking at RGB values throughout this exercise they will
> absolutely
> confuse the situation to no end.  You would be seeing another profile
> conversion to
> the working RGB space.  The numbers are fairly removed from what's in the
> data.
> 
> The one feature of PS that shows what's really there is the Histogram.  A
> stepwedge
> should have nice even combs there.
> 
> You need to Assign profiles to try the different grayspaces.

I would constrain this to:  you need to Assign a profile to see what colour
the same file number represents in the new space.

Assign keeps the numbers and changes the colour.

Convert changes the numbers and keeps the colour.

When we send a target to a printer for profiling we do so Without colour
management.  This is because we want to see how the printer reacts to
getting a particular number (which is of course all they react to other than
a good thump when they are clogged!).  We don't want this number changed at
any time by the colour management module.  Collect enough reactions to
numbers pairs and we can create a picture of how it will likely react to all
possible numbers.  With this profile, the colour management module does the
conversion of numbers sent (ie changes the numbers) so that the new numbers
represent the same colours on paper - subject of course to its policies with
respect to managing out-of-gamut colours.

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> ...A lot of
> people get confused by this stuff.

Really?

I have posted a pdf file at the link below with the results of some QTR
Create ICC tests I ran comparing a linearised QTR neutral curve mix
(technically the individual curves were linearised not the mix) without an
ICC profile, the same mix with an ICC profile generated by QTR Create ICC
and the Epson driver with a colour GM Eye One Match generated ICC profile.
The relevant file is called Colour Management Tests.

http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html

I sure as hell used to!  Convert this, assign that - after a while I forgot
which way was up.

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>

> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
>> 
>> ...A lot of
>> people get confused by this stuff.
> 
> Really?

Steve,

I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are  
seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and without  
icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default  
ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab working  
space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new  
step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print  
with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some  
compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.

Carl

On Oct 21, 2005, at 12:55 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

> I have posted a pdf file at the link below with the results of some  
> QTR
> Create ICC tests I ran comparing a linearised QTR neutral curve mix
> (technically the individual curves were linearised not the mix)  
> without an
> ICC profile, the same mix with an ICC profile generated by QTR  
> Create ICC
> and the Epson driver with a colour GM Eye One Match generated ICC  
> profile.
> The relevant file is called Colour Management Tests.
>
> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sorry, meant to send this directly to Steve.

Carl

On Oct 21, 2005, at 1:42 PM, Carl Schofield wrote:

> Steve,
>
> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are
> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and without
> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default
> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab working
> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new
> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print
> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some
> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
>
> Carl
> 
> On Oct 21, 2005, at 12:55 PM, Steve Kale wrote:
>
>
>> I have posted a pdf file at the link below with the results of some
>> QTR
>> Create ICC tests I ran comparing a linearised QTR neutral curve mix
>> (technically the individual curves were linearised not the mix)
>> without an
>> ICC profile, the same mix with an ICC profile generated by QTR
>> Create ICC
>> and the Epson driver with a colour GM Eye One Match generated ICC
>> profile.
>> The relevant file is called Colour Management Tests.
>>
>> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
>>

Carl 

I don't see the comparison but I would guess that what you are seeing makes
sense in that the profile is attempting to correct for poor linearity of the
Epson driver on HPR.  I'll print and measure a 51 step wedge with the 4800
ABW driver (without a profile) to HPR and post the results.

Steve

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:42:19 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are
> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and without
> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default
> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab working
> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new
> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print
> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some
> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
> 
> Carl
> ??
> On Oct 21, 2005, at 12:55 PM, Steve Kale wrote:
> 
>> I have posted a pdf file at the link below with the results of some
>> QTR
>> Create ICC tests I ran comparing a linearised QTR neutral curve mix
>> (technically the individual curves were linearised not the mix)
>> without an
>> ICC profile, the same mix with an ICC profile generated by QTR
>> Create ICC
>> and the Epson driver with a colour GM Eye One Match generated ICC
>> profile.
>> The relevant file is called Colour Management Tests.
>> 
>> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
>

It's mostly a matter of semantics.

But I think there are a few absolutes.  To me a stepwedge labeled 100, 95, 90...
better have the those numbers in the file.  If your 90 happens to have 94 in it
you not longer have a stepwedge -- you ought not to sample values there.
Your post mentioned various conversions of stepwedges -- this destroys the
stepwedge  --  it's NOT a stepwedge.  I can't emphasize that enough.

The important thing is that the K values are the actual numbers in the file, the
L values are the meaning of the numbers given a specific profile.  A stepwedge
ALWAYS has the same numbers,  ASSIGNing different profiles changes just the
meaning and therefore what you see as L values.

Your examples of converting files and find the same L values is just the definition
of what Convert does -- it finds the new file number that will lead to the same
L value.

-----------------

On a semi related issue, I looked at you PDF on Color Management.  You have 
basically a comparision of ABW vs QTR vs ICC.  The major point that is not 
mentioned is -- what's the profile attached to the stepwedge?  For the non-CM
cases this is irrelevant but for the CM cases its crucial to the results.  The fact
that a CM graph is different than a non-CM graph is natural since the goal is
very different.  And you'd get a different CM graph for different grayspaces.

One way to look at this is that a non-CM stepwedge print is printing evenly
spaced K values, but a CM print is printing L values that are spaced based on
the grayspace.  When you print a GG 2.2 wedge with CM what you are really
telling the driver to do is print a wedge with L values 0,1,5,13,20,26, ...
(these come from sampling L on a GG 2.2 wedge).

On the surface this may seem a picky technicality but it really is very different.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

> 
> > From: Roy Harrington <roy@h...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:07:46 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > Steve,
> > 
> > I think you kind of have this backwards.
> 
> No I think we are just talking across purposes.
> 
> 
> >All your Converts are changing the
> > file values.  
> 
> Correct
> 
> >By Converting you no longer have an even stepwedge.
> 
> Understood but then you are changing observations.  My point was that the
> visual separation of an image doesn't change.  If I work up an image in Gray
> Lab or GG2.2 or GG 1.8 and print it with conversion to the print profile
> each image will look the same.  So visual separation evident in the image is
> NOT dependent on workspace (unlike a Same as Source workflow).
> 
> Of course the colour represented by 90% grey in GG 2.2 is not the same
> colour as 90% grey in GG 1.8 - that's what is meant by the fact that these
> two colour spaces have different gamma.  90% grey in GG 2.2 is the same
> colour as 94% grey in GG 1.8.  (It is L* 6 in both cases because it is the
> same colour in both cases.)  90% grey in GG 1.8 is a lighter colour than 90%
> grey in GG 2.2 - and it will have a different L*.  If you are looking at two
> colours in an image (forget their corresponding workspace-dependent file
> values for a moment) their separation in print is not altered by workspace
> in a colour managed workflow.  So when thinking about what happens to your
> image on conversion to a print profile don't be confused about these gamma
> differences in workspaces.  In each case the file value sent to the printer
> is adjusted by the appropriate amount to render the proper colour.
> 
> This is what I meant by an illusion of sample.  If we choose to sample 94%
> grey then yes this colour and its "separation" from 100% K moves with
> workspace - or more accurately with gamma.  This IS the definition of gamma.
> But by so doing we are sampling different colours.  94% only has meaning
> when attached to a profile.  When we print an image we do not see a bunch of
> numbers on the page but a bunch of colours.  The separation of the print
> space is determined by the print space NOT the workspace.
> 
> (To emphasise the point, get a step wedge and tag it first with GG 2.2 and
> print it with the printer profile, then convert it to 1.8 and print it with
> the printer profile.  The prints will look the same regardless of your
> workspace.  In each case you are printing different file values and
> different observation points on each greyscale but satisfy yourself that you
> are printing the same colours.)
> 
> It's pedantic point but an important one if you are coming from a Same as
> Source workflow where file values are printed without conversion with
> respect to the print space.  In that case workspace does matter.  A lot of
> people get confused by this stuff.
> 
> >What you 
> > see
> > with the K and Lab values are the actual values.  K is calculated by
> > (255-gray)/2.55
> > and L is the actual calculated Luminosity based on the grayscale profile.
> > 
> > BTW, if you are looking at RGB values throughout this exercise they will
> > absolutely
> > confuse the situation to no end.  You would be seeing another profile
> > conversion to
> > the working RGB space.  The numbers are fairly removed from what's in the
> > data.
> > 
> > The one feature of PS that shows what's really there is the Histogram.  A
> > stepwedge
> > should have nice even combs there.
> > 
> > You need to Assign profiles to try the different grayspaces.
> 
> I would constrain this to:  you need to Assign a profile to see what colour
> the same file number represents in the new space.
> 
> Assign keeps the numbers and changes the colour.
> 
> Convert changes the numbers and keeps the colour.
> 
> When we send a target to a printer for profiling we do so Without colour
> management.  This is because we want to see how the printer reacts to
> getting a particular number (which is of course all they react to other than
> a good thump when they are clogged!).  We don't want this number changed at
> any time by the colour management module.  Collect enough reactions to
> numbers pairs and we can create a picture of how it will likely react to all
> possible numbers.  With this profile, the colour management module does the
> conversion of numbers sent (ie changes the numbers) so that the new numbers
> represent the same colours on paper - subject of course to its policies with
> respect to managing out-of-gamut colours.
> 
> Steve
>

Steve and Carl,

I think this may be the very issue I mention in the last post.
When you are printing with CM, it is VERY IMPORTANT to know what the
embedded profile is. 
Carl says here Gray Lab but I think Steve is using GG 2.2 (not positive though)
so they a supposed to get different results.

Roy


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield <scho@m...> 
wrote:

>
> Steve,
> 
> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are  
> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and without  
> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default  
> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab working  
> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new  
> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print  
> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some  
> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
> 
> Carl
>

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:15:52 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> 
> It's mostly a matter of semantics.

I was trying emphasise the point, particularly following a conversation with
Paul Roark, that when you have a colour managed workflow your workspace
doesn't matter because you convert to the print space at printing.  Of
course when sending stimulus data to the printer for profiling you want to
send the right file values (the values you think you are sending).  But once
profiled you needn't worry about this.  If you work up an image in GG2.2 and
then also in Lab so that they look exactly the same and print each with the
same properly made profile, then the two images will print exactly the same.

(Paul had asked whether editing in Gray Lab would change the shadow
compression he was witnessing.  Answer: no.  That is, exploring different
workspaces doesn't get you anywhere in a colour managed workflow.)




> 
> But I think there are a few absolutes.  To me a stepwedge labeled 100, 95,
> 90...
> better have the those numbers in the file.  If your 90 happens to have 94 in
> it
> you not longer have a stepwedge -- you ought not to sample values there.
> Your post mentioned various conversions of stepwedges -- this destroys the
> stepwedge  --  it's NOT a stepwedge.  I can't emphasize that enough.

Yes I was using the step wedge as an example of an "image".  I am talking
post profiling workflow.  You're talking profiling.

> 
> The important thing is that the K values are the actual numbers in the file,
> the
> L values are the meaning of the numbers given a specific profile.  A stepwedge
> ALWAYS has the same numbers,  ASSIGNing different profiles changes just the
> meaning and therefore what you see as L values.

Yes and when you send the file values for the profiling exercise nothing has
changed because Assign leaves the file values unchanged.  But if it were an
image for print, assigning a different profile will change the look of the
image and the print.

> 
> Your examples of converting files and find the same L values is just the
> definition
> of what Convert does -- it finds the new file number that will lead to the
> same
> L value.

Yes.  
> 
> -----------------
> 
> On a semi related issue, I looked at you PDF on Color Management.  You have
> basically a comparision of ABW vs QTR vs ICC.  The major point that is not
> mentioned is -- what's the profile attached to the stepwedge?  For the non-CM
> cases this is irrelevant but for the CM cases its crucial to the results.  The
> fact
> that a CM graph is different than a non-CM graph is natural since the goal is
> very different.  And you'd get a different CM graph for different grayspaces.
> 
> One way to look at this is that a non-CM stepwedge print is printing evenly
> spaced K values, but a CM print is printing L values that are spaced based on
> the grayspace.  

Yes.


>When you print a GG 2.2 wedge with CM what you are really
> telling the driver to do is print a wedge with L values 0,1,5,13,20,26, ...
> (these come from sampling L on a GG 2.2 wedge).
> 
> On the surface this may seem a picky technicality but it really is very
> different.

No - I understand.  In each case the file was untagged grey and so I believe
in each case the same file numbers were sent.

Here is the results of sending 51-step data to my 4800 with Neutral/Darker,
2880, finest detail and the Epson Velvet Fine Art paper setting using HPR
paper:

  
 SampleID SAMPLE_NAME GRAY LAB_L LAB_A LAB_B
 21 G3 100 14.73 0.31 0.51
 19 G1 98 15.21 0.43 0.53
 17 F2 96 15.97 0.48 0.6
 15 E3 94 16.66 0.44 0.54
 13 E1 92 17.65 0.28 0.35
 11 D2 90 18.89 -0.03 0.05
 9 C3 88 20.02 -0.24 -0.19
 7 C1 86 21.27 -0.25 -0.34
 5 B2 84 22.66 -0.23 -0.77
 3 A3 82 24.29 -0.12 -0.87
 1 A1 80 25.92 -0.01 -0.87
 50 Q2 78 27.55 0.09 -0.73
 48 P3 76 29.09 0.15 -0.46
 46 P1 74 30.91 0.21 -0.35
 44 O2 72 32.98 0.45 -0.25
 42 N3 70 34.81 0.57 0.07
 40 N1 68 36.7 0.61 0.02
 38 M2 66 38.48 0.81 0.28
 36 L3 64 40.12 0.86 0.25
 34 L1 62 42.07 0.83 0.41
 32 K2 60 43.84 0.89 0.53
 30 J3 58 45.73 0.86 0.52
 28 J1 56 47.35 0.89 0.61
 26 I2 54 49.56 0.9 0.59
 24 H3 52 51.3 0.97 0.6
 22 H1 50 52.98 0.94 0.58
 20 G2 48 54.8 0.96 0.5
 18 F3 46 56.47 0.92 0.56
 16 F1 44 58.32 0.87 0.62
 14 E2 42 60.21 0.86 0.69
 12 D3 40 62.03 0.81 0.76
 10 D1 38 63.83 0.85 0.72
 8 C2 36 66.05 0.74 0.81
 6 B3 34 68.01 0.91 0.68
 4 B1 32 69.88 0.74 0.67
 2 A2 30 71.61 0.89 0.58
 51 Q3 28 73.76 0.88 0.61
 49 Q1 26 75.48 0.92 0.5
 47 P2 24 77.41 0.94 0.46
 45 O3 22 79.27 0.91 0.2
 43 O1 20 81.21 0.95 -0.01
 41 N2 18 83.12 0.94 -0.01
 39 M3 16 84.9 0.9 -0.27
 37 M1 14 86.59 0.88 -0.56
 35 L2 12 88.09 0.83 -0.66
 33 K3 10 89.74 0.91 -0.56
 31 K1 8 91.4 0.85 -0.72
 29 J2 6 93 0.89 -0.93
 27 I3 4 94.62 0.86 -1.01
 25 I1 2 96.26 0.85 -1.2
 23 H2 0 97.7 0.79 -1.31

Specifically I printed the QTR-51-random tiff file, completely un-colour
managed.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:57:23 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Carl 
> 
> I don't see the comparison but I would guess that what you are seeing makes
> sense in that the profile is attempting to correct for poor linearity of the
> Epson driver on HPR.  I'll print and measure a 51 step wedge with the 4800
> ABW driver (without a profile) to HPR and post the results.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
>> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:42:19 -0400
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>> 
>> Steve,
>> 
>> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are
>> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and without
>> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default
>> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab working
>> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new
>> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print
>> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some
>> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
>> 
>> Carl

I am sending untagged raw data.  I agree Carl may find he is not sending the
file numbers he thinks he is if he has chosen to colour manage the step
wedge.

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:29:09 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Steve and Carl,
> 
> I think this may be the very issue I mention in the last post.
> When you are printing with CM, it is VERY IMPORTANT to know what the
> embedded profile is.
> Carl says here Gray Lab but I think Steve is using GG 2.2 (not positive
> though)
> so they a supposed to get different results.
> 
> Roy
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield
> <scho@m...> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> Steve,
>> 
>> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are
>> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and without
>> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default
>> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab working
>> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new
>> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print
>> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some
>> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
>> 
>> Carl

What's interesting about this data when plotted is that Epson appears to
have built in a degree of curvature into the response of the ABW driver.
It's as though they have built bpc into the lookup table based on their
standard printer, their inks and (each of) their papers....

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 19:47:00 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Here is the results of sending 51-step data to my 4800 with Neutral/Darker,
> 2880, finest detail and the Epson Velvet Fine Art paper setting using HPR
> paper:
> 
>   
>  SampleID SAMPLE_NAME GRAY LAB_L LAB_A LAB_B
>  21 G3 100 14.73 0.31 0.51
>  19 G1 98 15.21 0.43 0.53
>  17 F2 96 15.97 0.48 0.6
>  15 E3 94 16.66 0.44 0.54
>  13 E1 92 17.65 0.28 0.35
>  11 D2 90 18.89 -0.03 0.05
>  9 C3 88 20.02 -0.24 -0.19
>  7 C1 86 21.27 -0.25 -0.34
>  5 B2 84 22.66 -0.23 -0.77
>  3 A3 82 24.29 -0.12 -0.87
>  1 A1 80 25.92 -0.01 -0.87
>  50 Q2 78 27.55 0.09 -0.73
>  48 P3 76 29.09 0.15 -0.46
>  46 P1 74 30.91 0.21 -0.35
>  44 O2 72 32.98 0.45 -0.25
>  42 N3 70 34.81 0.57 0.07
>  40 N1 68 36.7 0.61 0.02
>  38 M2 66 38.48 0.81 0.28
>  36 L3 64 40.12 0.86 0.25
>  34 L1 62 42.07 0.83 0.41
>  32 K2 60 43.84 0.89 0.53
>  30 J3 58 45.73 0.86 0.52
>  28 J1 56 47.35 0.89 0.61
>  26 I2 54 49.56 0.9 0.59
>  24 H3 52 51.3 0.97 0.6
>  22 H1 50 52.98 0.94 0.58
>  20 G2 48 54.8 0.96 0.5
>  18 F3 46 56.47 0.92 0.56
>  16 F1 44 58.32 0.87 0.62
>  14 E2 42 60.21 0.86 0.69
>  12 D3 40 62.03 0.81 0.76
>  10 D1 38 63.83 0.85 0.72
>  8 C2 36 66.05 0.74 0.81
>  6 B3 34 68.01 0.91 0.68
>  4 B1 32 69.88 0.74 0.67
>  2 A2 30 71.61 0.89 0.58
>  51 Q3 28 73.76 0.88 0.61
>  49 Q1 26 75.48 0.92 0.5
>  47 P2 24 77.41 0.94 0.46
>  45 O3 22 79.27 0.91 0.2
>  43 O1 20 81.21 0.95 -0.01
>  41 N2 18 83.12 0.94 -0.01
>  39 M3 16 84.9 0.9 -0.27
>  37 M1 14 86.59 0.88 -0.56
>  35 L2 12 88.09 0.83 -0.66
>  33 K3 10 89.74 0.91 -0.56
>  31 K1 8 91.4 0.85 -0.72
>  29 J2 6 93 0.89 -0.93
>  27 I3 4 94.62 0.86 -1.01
>  25 I1 2 96.26 0.85 -1.2
>  23 H2 0 97.7 0.79 -1.31
> 
> Specifically I printed the QTR-51-random tiff file, completely un-colour
> managed.

I didn't convert the step wedge and used no color management for  
printing for calibration, so the numbers were not changed.

On Oct 21, 2005, at 2:50 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

> I am sending untagged raw data.  I agree Carl may find he is not  
> sending the
> file numbers he thinks he is if he has chosen to colour manage the  
> step
> wedge.
>
>
>
>> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:29:09 -0000
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>
>> Steve and Carl,
>>
>> I think this may be the very issue I mention in the last post.
>> When you are printing with CM, it is VERY IMPORTANT to know what the
>> embedded profile is.
>> Carl says here Gray Lab but I think Steve is using GG 2.2 (not  
>> positive
>> though)
>> so they a supposed to get different results.
>>
>> Roy
>>
>>
>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield
>> <scho@m...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you are
>>> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and  
>>> without
>>> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using default
>>> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab  
>>> working
>>> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form the new
>>> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for print
>>> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some
>>> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
>>>
>>> Carl
>>>

But when you brought it into PS it says this doc doesn't have a profile and
you said Don't Colour Manage this document?  I think we're double checking
because you always mention your workspace.  Have you tried other paper
settings for HPR eg Velvet Fine Art?  I am surprised the Epson driver is
cramming the bottom end so much.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:04:47 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I didn't convert the step wedge and used no color management for
> printing for calibration, so the numbers were not changed.
> 
>

I hate to beat this to death but once you select a printing
profile in the Print with Preview -- there is NO SUCH THING
as UNTAGGED RAW DATA.  If there is no embedded profile it will
use the Working Gray Space.  It has to have a source profile in
order to apply the print profile.  It's never one-sided.  There
no such thing as converting a raw file into a print profile.

So if you guys compare results when printing with ICC profiles
the source profiles make a difference and if you see Untagged
then the working space is critical.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> I am sending untagged raw data.  I agree Carl may find he is not 
sending the
> file numbers he thinks he is if he has chosen to colour manage the 
step
> wedge.
> 
> 
> > From: Roy Harrington <roy@h...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:29:09 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson 
driver
> > 
> > Steve and Carl,
> > 
> > I think this may be the very issue I mention in the last post.
> > When you are printing with CM, it is VERY IMPORTANT to know what 
the
> > embedded profile is.
> > Carl says here Gray Lab but I think Steve is using GG 2.2 (not 
positive
> > though)
> > so they a supposed to get different results.
> > 
> > Roy
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl 
Schofield
> > <scho@m...> 
> > wrote:
> >> 
> >> Steve,
> >> 
> >> I seem to be getting results that are different from what you 
are
> >> seeing.  Below is a comparison of density and Lab-L, with and 
without
> >> icc profile.  Printed with 2400, MK, Hahnemuhle PR BW, using 
default
> >> ABW neutral-darker settings and 2880 dpi (RPM).  QTR gray lab 
working
> >> space.  Create-icc (2.3.2) used to make the icc profile form 
the new
> >> step-wedge (10, 5, 1 % steps), but standard 21 step used for 
print

> >> with the icc applied.  Note that without the icc there is some
> >> compression in the shadow region that is improved with the icc.
> >> 
> >> Carl
>

OK I understand but I am not trying to compare my colour managed results
with Carl's. (I haven't even done an HPR AB&W print using colour
management.)  I was principally concerned with comparing the GM colour
profile vs the QTR create ICC profile.  The point was to do a very rough
cross check on your BPC and to show that the sort of impact at the black end
of the scale of the QTR Create ICC profile is consistent with what a GM HPR
colour profile does, ie it would appear to be behaving correctly.  (I was
disappointed the Epson colour driver did not get the same min L* to make the
comparison more direct.) A great deal of comfort is gained if we see a
performance consistent with the colour community's widely deployed colour
management.  Then it is also valid to compare the linearised un-managed
output (ie the workflow prior to QTR Create ICC) with ICC profile managed
output - not the actual points (which for two of the charts are influenced
by my GG 2.2 workspace) but the "general" shape of the TRC. That is to say,
as expected, colour management compresses the dark end of the scale and
generally lowers the L* of the TRC.

Re Carl's work, I have simply noted the very tight compression in the
straight non-colour managed output.  If he is printing an untagged document
without colour management then he is sending unaltered pixel values
presumably with the observations he intends.  (My desire to confirm the
document isn't tagged in  anyway is to ensure that, say, a 95% step is
actually 95% K etc.)  He observed only a 0.77 difference in L* between 95%
and 100%.  My Adv B&W printout (without colour management) on the 4800 shows
an L* difference of 3.08 between 100 and 96 and 4.7 between 100 and 94.
Hence my question as to his choice of paper setting.  For HPR I used Velvet
Fine Art and I wondered whether if he used this paper setting the ink load
etc may provide less bunching in the dark end. This isn't anything to do
with colour management but rather the basic performance of the 2400 Adv B&W
driver.  BTW Carl I am using Eboni in the K slot which I think is another
difference.  I agree our colour managed observations are not comparable
because of the different workspaces.  His 50% patch would be seeking an L*
of 50 vs my 54.

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:57:51 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> 
> I hate to beat this to death but once you select a printing
> profile in the Print with Preview -- there is NO SUCH THING
> as UNTAGGED RAW DATA.  If there is no embedded profile it will
> use the Working Gray Space.  It has to have a source profile in
> order to apply the print profile.  It's never one-sided.  There
> no such thing as converting a raw file into a print profile.
> 
> So if you guys compare results when printing with ICC profiles
> the source profiles make a difference and if you see Untagged
> then the working space is critical.
> 
> Roy

Sorry 1.24 and 1.93 respectively.  In the grand scheme of things not a great
deal of difference and likely simpply due to my Eboni ink.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>

> 4800 shows
> an L* difference of 3.08 between 100 and 96 and 4.7 between 100 and 94.
> Hence my question as to his choice of paper setting.

Steve,

I sent more detailed comments directly, but see below also:

On Oct 21, 2005, at 9:18 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

> OK I understand but I am not trying to compare my colour managed  
> results
> with Carl's. (I haven't even done an HPR AB&W print using colour
> management.)  I was principally concerned with comparing the GM colour
> profile vs the QTR create ICC profile.  The point was to do a very  
> rough
> cross check on your BPC and to show that the sort of impact at the  
> black end
> of the scale of the QTR Create ICC profile is consistent with what  
> a GM HPR
> colour profile does, ie it would appear to be behaving correctly.   
> (I was
> disappointed the Epson colour driver did not get the same min L* to  
> make the
> comparison more direct.) A great deal of comfort is gained if we see a
> performance consistent with the colour community's widely deployed  
> colour
> management.  Then it is also valid to compare the linearised un- 
> managed
> output (ie the workflow prior to QTR Create ICC) with ICC profile  
> managed
> output - not the actual points (which for two of the charts are  
> influenced
> by my GG 2.2 workspace) but the "general" shape of the TRC. That is  
> to say,
> as expected, colour management compresses the dark end of the scale  
> and
> generally lowers the L* of the TRC.
>
> Re Carl's work, I have simply noted the very tight compression in the
> straight non-colour managed output.  If he is printing an untagged  
> document
> without colour management then he is sending unaltered pixel values
> presumably with the observations he intends.  (My desire to confirm  
> the
> document isn't tagged in  anyway is to ensure that, say, a 95% step is
> actually 95% K etc.)
95% is 95 K, etc., there was no conversion to screw up the numbers,  
but it doesn't matter if the file is tagged or untagged in this  
situation.
>  He observed only a 0.77 difference in L* between 95%
> and 100%.  My Adv B&W printout (without colour management) on the  
> 4800 shows
> an L* difference of 3.08 between 100 and 96 and 4.7 between 100 and  
> 94.
Better driver in the 4800 or MK vs Eboni?
> Hence my question as to his choice of paper setting.  For HPR I  
> used Velvet
> Fine Art and I wondered whether if he used this paper setting the  
> ink load
> etc may provide less bunching in the dark end.
I also used the VFA setting.

> This isn't anything to do
> with colour management but rather the basic performance of the 2400  
> Adv B&W
> driver.  BTW Carl I am using Eboni in the K slot which I think is  
> another
> difference.  I agree our colour managed observations are not  
> comparable
> because of the different workspaces.  His 50% patch would be  
> seeking an L*
> of 50 vs my 54.
>
>
>
>> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:57:51 -0000
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>>
>>
>> I hate to beat this to death but once you select a printing
>> profile in the Print with Preview -- there is NO SUCH THING
>> as UNTAGGED RAW DATA.  If there is no embedded profile it will
>> use the Working Gray Space.  It has to have a source profile in
>> order to apply the print profile.  It's never one-sided.  There
>> no such thing as converting a raw file into a print profile.
>>
>> So if you guys compare results when printing with ICC profiles
>> the source profiles make a difference and if you see Untagged
>> then the working space is critical.
>>
>> Roy
>>

I agree though that for each colour managed line I should have plotted the
L* expected by the colour patch given my workspace against the actual
achieved, rather than the "step vs the L*" - I agree the step is no longer
valid - and compared this against the linear line of the non colour-managed
output.  

>>I was principally concerned with comparing the GM colour
>> profile vs the QTR create ICC profile.  The point was to do a very
>> rough
>> cross check on your BPC and to show that the sort of impact at the
>> black end
>> of the scale of the QTR Create ICC profile is consistent with what
>> a GM HPR
>> colour profile does, ie it would appear to be behaving correctly.
>> (I was
>> disappointed the Epson colour driver did not get the same min L* to
>> make the
>> comparison more direct.) A great deal of comfort is gained if we see a
>> performance consistent with the colour community's widely deployed
>> colour
>> management.

I believe that the graph in the document "Linear vs ICC L* Output" is a much
more accurate depiction of the effect of QTR ICC colour management of my QTR
HPR greyscale curves.

http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html

Please correct me if I am wrong!  I read the L* in the Lab info palette for
each patch given my GG2.2 workspace and plotted this expected number vs the
actual output of the print.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:50:52 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I agree though that for each colour managed line I should have plotted the
> L* expected by the colour patch given my workspace against the actual
> achieved, rather than the "step vs the L*" - I agree the step is no longer
> valid - and compared this against the linear line of the non colour-managed
> output.

BTW.....

Recalling my question of the 20th:

"3.  I'd like to understand why linearisation is best done with respect to
L* and not XYZ_Y which is where the scaling is done.  This obviously
requires the first item to be understood.  I would guess it has something to
do with the linearity of L* as a concept and ease of interpolation but then
on that I am just guessing."


.... there ought to be no reason why one couldn't incorporate into a RIP a
"smart linearisation" (for want of a better term) which incorporated a
transform from the unlinearised data to linear data and a transform to bpc
and white point scaled output - all in one hit.  We are just doing this in
two steps with the advantage that we gain a soft proofing tool and, very
importantly, separation from a defined workspace.  (These are not
insignificant advantages.)

The scaled output is a curve but an ICC profile still has to interpolate
such a curve as would the RIP.  I would be interested if there is any
difference in the maths at the end of the day - I suspect not.  I have no
idea how it would complicate the mixing of two curves though.

The ICC approach is dramatically more flexible but a RIP designer without
these skills could reprogram their linearisation function for a defined
workspace and achieve most of the same result.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 03:20:14 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I believe that the graph in the document "Linear vs ICC L* Output" is a much
> more accurate depiction of the effect of QTR ICC colour management of my QTR
> HPR greyscale curves.
> 
> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong!  I read the L* in the Lab info palette for
> each patch given my GG2.2 workspace and plotted this expected number vs the
> actual output of the print.
> 
> 
>> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:50:52 +0100
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>> 
>> I agree though that for each colour managed line I should have plotted the
>> L* expected by the colour patch given my workspace against the actual
>> achieved, rather than the "step vs the L*" - I agree the step is no longer
>> valid - and compared this against the linear line of the non colour-managed
>> output.

You could do the all-in-one "smart linearization".  Like you said it would be
possible to match a specific assumed embedded profile -- but of course it's
only good for only one input profile space.  To use other workspaces you'd be
putting say GG 2.2 as your print space, so it boils down to the same situation
-- a print profile and QTR settings including the QTR profile.

The QTR linearization method isn't an absolute.  It could just as easily have been
something else.  

Roy


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

>
> BTW.....
> 
> Recalling my question of the 20th:
> 
> "3.  I'd like to understand why linearisation is best done with respect to
> L* and not XYZ_Y which is where the scaling is done.  This obviously
> requires the first item to be understood.  I would guess it has something to
> do with the linearity of L* as a concept and ease of interpolation but then
> on that I am just guessing."
> 
> 
> .... there ought to be no reason why one couldn't incorporate into a RIP a
> "smart linearisation" (for want of a better term) which incorporated a
> transform from the unlinearised data to linear data and a transform to bpc
> and white point scaled output - all in one hit.  We are just doing this in
> two steps with the advantage that we gain a soft proofing tool and, very
> importantly, separation from a defined workspace.  (These are not
> insignificant advantages.)
> 
> The scaled output is a curve but an ICC profile still has to interpolate
> such a curve as would the RIP.  I would be interested if there is any
> difference in the maths at the end of the day - I suspect not.  I have no
> idea how it would complicate the mixing of two curves though.
> 
> The ICC approach is dramatically more flexible but a RIP designer without
> these skills could reprogram their linearisation function for a defined
> workspace and achieve most of the same result.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > From: Steve Kale <stevekale@b...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 03:20:14 +0100
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > I believe that the graph in the document "Linear vs ICC L* Output" is a much
> > more accurate depiction of the effect of QTR ICC colour management of my QTR
> > HPR greyscale curves.
> > 
> > http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
> > 
> > Please correct me if I am wrong!  I read the L* in the Lab info palette for
> > each patch given my GG2.2 workspace and plotted this expected number vs the
> > actual output of the print.
> > 
> > 
> >> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@b...>
> >> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:50:52 +0100
> >> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> >> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> >> 
> >> I agree though that for each colour managed line I should have plotted the
> >> L* expected by the colour patch given my workspace against the actual
> >> achieved, rather than the "step vs the L*" - I agree the step is no longer
> >> valid - and compared this against the linear line of the non colour-managed
> >> output.
>

Looks fine -- but then again, it's hard to tell what you should be getting.

The real question should be:  what does the graph of "the screen" look like?
In other words and more important which matches what you see on the screen.
I don't know of anyway to "measure" this match accuracy.  But that's what
I think we really want to know.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

>
> I believe that the graph in the document "Linear vs ICC L* Output" is a much
> more accurate depiction of the effect of QTR ICC colour management of my QTR
> HPR greyscale curves.
> 
> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong!  I read the L* in the Lab info palette for
> each patch given my GG2.2 workspace and plotted this expected number vs the
> actual output of the print.
> 
> 
> > From: Steve Kale <stevekale@b...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:50:52 +0100
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Conversation: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > I agree though that for each colour managed line I should have plotted the
> > L* expected by the colour patch given my workspace against the actual
> > achieved, rather than the "step vs the L*" - I agree the step is no longer
> > valid - and compared this against the linear line of the non colour-managed
> > output.
>

Agreed.  Since I have been a participant on this forum, the question of
"what should we really be linearizing to" has been one of the deeper
recurring questions.  I think the fall-back to linearizing L* hasn't really
been that understood.  The net-net of what we have learnt on this exercise
is that, for a given workspace, one is likely best to target a
"linearization" that generates a luminance curve that reflects bpc and wtpt
scaling - rather than a straight (linear) line.  We always knew that in any
Same as Source workflow the workspace or document space influenced results.
I don't believe people tried different workspaces for any other reason than
to try to influence the output. (GG 2.2 and all the others each have all the
colours we need.)  Given the understanding generated from the whole QTR
Create ICC path, I think we have found new insight into the "ideal" B&W
linearization, looked at from an end result.  Personally, I wonder if Epson,
Cone et al have been deploying this knowledge also.

The ICC approach is of course more flexible because it can handle any
document space (not a biggie in that if one had to only use one there is
little disadvantage) and it provides built in soft proofing.  The latter is
the key advantage over the "smart linearization" approach.  It does,
however, introduce another step in the workflow and another hurdle for
understanding.  Personally, I think it's all very, very worth it.

Steve

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 06:56:11 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> 
> You could do the all-in-one "smart linearization".  Like you said it would be
> possible to match a specific assumed embedded profile -- but of course it's
> only good for only one input profile space.  To use other workspaces you'd be
> putting say GG 2.2 as your print space, so it boils down to the same situation
> -- a print profile and QTR settings including the QTR profile.
> 
> The QTR linearization method isn't an absolute.  It could just as easily have
> been
> something else.  
> 
> Roy
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> BTW.....
>> 
>> Recalling my question of the 20th:
>> 
>> "3.  I'd like to understand why linearisation is best done with respect to
>> L* and not XYZ_Y which is where the scaling is done.  This obviously
>> requires the first item to be understood.  I would guess it has something to
>> do with the linearity of L* as a concept and ease of interpolation but then
>> on that I am just guessing."
>> 
>> 
>> .... there ought to be no reason why one couldn't incorporate into a RIP a
>> "smart linearisation" (for want of a better term) which incorporated a
>> transform from the unlinearised data to linear data and a transform to bpc
>> and white point scaled output - all in one hit.  We are just doing this in
>> two steps with the advantage that we gain a soft proofing tool and, very
>> importantly, separation from a defined workspace.  (These are not
>> insignificant advantages.)
>> 
>> The scaled output is a curve but an ICC profile still has to interpolate
>> such a curve as would the RIP.  I would be interested if there is any
>> difference in the maths at the end of the day - I suspect not.  I have no
>> idea how it would complicate the mixing of two curves though.
>> 
>> The ICC approach is dramatically more flexible but a RIP designer without
>> these skills could reprogram their linearisation function for a defined
>> workspace and achieve most of the same result.

That gets a bit circular doesn't it? The first question is does the scaling
make sense and then the second is whether the soft proof implementation was
done correctly.  One could get a match between display and print but still
not have a visually appealing result in print.

I find, at least thus far, the results of the scaling to be very good in
print.  I have not had to edit an image to any extent for print - I have
been happy with the tonal management by the profile.  It would be nice if
more experienced eyes than mine could confirm the same.

I still have a tough time with the soft proofs though.  The black point
shift on screen seems excessive.  (BTW this is true whether I use a QTR ICC
profile or a GM EyeOne Match profile.)  My Apple Display has quite a good
black point, L*=3.6, and so the shift to a matte paper of around L*=15 is in
fact quite a change.  I also do not have a D50 light box for print viewing
and it's most likely that the my general viewing environment around my
display is well less than D50.  These factors would of course explain the
result.  In general, because I have been happy with the prints I have tended
to soft proof less - just a quick check to confirm thoughts re hue
preference.

(BTW it is interesting to note that the dynamic range we can achieve in B&W
on photo paper now exceeds a quality display.  You can't soft proof the
print range!)

Steve

> From: Roy Harrington <roy@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 07:06:15 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> 
> Looks fine -- but then again, it's hard to tell what you should be getting.
> 
> The real question should be:  what does the graph of "the screen" look like?
> In other words and more important which matches what you see on the screen.
> I don't know of anyway to "measure" this match accuracy.  But that's what
> I think we really want to know.
> 
> Roy
>

I have been pleased with the SoLux 4700oK Task Lamp.
https://www.nleinternet.net/solux/cgi-bin/tlistore/19115.html  info at
http://www.solux.net/
It's a nice desk lamp with a quality diffuser, and has excellent color.

I also have fixtures with the same 4700 SoLux lamp, without the diffuser.
The light output is not nearly as nice.

They say, "For all Canadian and International orders please call or email us
at 800-254-4487 or soluxlamps@...."

(BTW, my middle grade LCD (213t) BP/WP is L*=2.3 L*=126, so no dynamic range
problem.)

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 7:57 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver

That gets a bit circular doesn't it? The first question is does the scaling
make sense and then the second is whether the soft proof implementation was
done correctly.  One could get a match between display and print but still
not have a visually appealing result in print.

I find, at least thus far, the results of the scaling to be very good in
print.  I have not had to edit an image to any extent for print - I have
been happy with the tonal management by the profile.  It would be nice if
more experienced eyes than mine could confirm the same.

I still have a tough time with the soft proofs though.  The black point
shift on screen seems excessive.  (BTW this is true whether I use a QTR ICC
profile or a GM EyeOne Match profile.)  My Apple Display has quite a good
black point, L*=3.6, and so the shift to a matte paper of around L*=15 is in
fact quite a change.  I also do not have a D50 light box for print viewing
and it's most likely that the my general viewing environment around my
display is well less than D50.  These factors would of course explain the
result.  In general, because I have been happy with the prints I have tended
to soft proof less - just a quick check to confirm thoughts re hue
preference.

(BTW it is interesting to note that the dynamic range we can achieve in B&W
on photo paper now exceeds a quality display.  You can't soft proof the
print range!)

Steve





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for the link.  I didn't realise you can buy D50 bulbs that will fit
into normal Halogen ceiling lighting.  Do you know if the pins are the thin
version?  Hard to tell from the picture.  I should give them a call. They're
not much more expensive than regular halogen bulbs here in London.


My LCD must be getting old...the damn things just keep getting better!  My
2x2.5Ghz G5 just got creamed by the new Quad G5 also...  :-(

> From: John Moody <moodymz3@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 08:56:52 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I have been pleased with the SoLux 4700oK Task Lamp.
> https://www.nleinternet.net/solux/cgi-bin/tlistore/19115.html  info at
> http://www.solux.net/
> It's a nice desk lamp with a quality diffuser, and has excellent color.
> 
> I also have fixtures with the same 4700 SoLux lamp, without the diffuser.
> The light output is not nearly as nice.
> 
> They say, "For all Canadian and International orders please call or email us
> at 800-254-4487 or soluxlamps@...."
> 
> (BTW, my middle grade LCD (213t) BP/WP is L*=2.3 L*=126, so no dynamic range
> problem.)
> 
> Best regards,
> John Moody

You just gotta love the UK.  A Solux bulb costs USD 10.95 in the US.  The
only UK prices I have been able to find is for 4700K bulbs - GBP 12.95 each!
210% of the price in the US.  Un-F*&^>"! believable.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>

> 
> Thanks for the link.  I didn't realise you can buy D50 bulbs that will fit
> into normal Halogen ceiling lighting.  Do you know if the pins are the thin
> version?  Hard to tell from the picture.  I should give them a call. They're
> not much more expensive than regular halogen bulbs here in London.
> 
> 
> My LCD must be getting old...the damn things just keep getting better!  My
> 2x2.5Ghz G5 just got creamed by the new Quad G5 also...  :-(
> 
>> From: John Moody <moodymz3@...>

>> 
>> I have been pleased with the SoLux 4700oK Task Lamp.
>> https://www.nleinternet.net/solux/cgi-bin/tlistore/19115.html  info at
>> http://www.solux.net/
>> It's a nice desk lamp with a quality diffuser, and has excellent color.
>> 
>> I also have fixtures with the same 4700 SoLux lamp, without the diffuser.
>> The light output is not nearly as nice.
>> 
>> They say, "For all Canadian and International orders please call or email us
>> at 800-254-4487 or soluxlamps@...."
>> 
>> (BTW, my middle grade LCD (213t) BP/WP is L*=2.3 L*=126, so no dynamic range
>> problem.)
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> John Moody

The pins measure precisely 2.00mm in diameter.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 9:15 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver

Thanks for the link.  I didn't realise you can buy D50 bulbs that will fit
into normal Halogen ceiling lighting.  Do you know if the pins are the thin
version?  Hard to tell from the picture.  I should give them a call. They're
not much more expensive than regular halogen bulbs here in London.


My LCD must be getting old...the damn things just keep getting better!  My
2x2.5Ghz G5 just got creamed by the new Quad G5 also...  :-(

> From: John Moody <moodymz3@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 08:56:52 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
>
> I have been pleased with the SoLux 4700oK Task Lamp.
> https://www.nleinternet.net/solux/cgi-bin/tlistore/19115.html  info at
> http://www.solux.net/
> It's a nice desk lamp with a quality diffuser, and has excellent color.
>
> I also have fixtures with the same 4700 SoLux lamp, without the diffuser.
> The light output is not nearly as nice.
>
> They say, "For all Canadian and International orders please call or email
us
> at 800-254-4487 or soluxlamps@...."
>
> (BTW, my middle grade LCD (213t) BP/WP is L*=2.3 L*=126, so no dynamic
range
> problem.)
>
> Best regards,
> John Moody




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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
MODERATORS 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  OWNER AND
MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




SPONSORED LINKS
Digital wedding photography
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+
wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+coll
ege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photog
raphy+course&c=6&%20>
Learn digital photography
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+we
dding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+colleg
e&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photogra
phy+course&c=6&s=%20>
Digital photography college
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+
wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+coll
ege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photog
raphy+course&c=6&%20>
Digital photography
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+
photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=D
igital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+co
urse&c=6&s=188&.s%20>
Digital photography web site
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital
+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+col
lege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photo
graphy+course&c=6%20>
Digital photography course
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+w
edding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+colle
ge&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photogr
aphy+course&c=6&s%20>

  _____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

*          Visit your group " DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint> " on the web.

*          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Uns
ubscribe>

*          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

  _____



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Steve,

Another great light source is a fluorescent bulb made by Philips.  They 
have almost exactly 5000K temp with a 98CRI. It doesn't get much better 
than that.  I've measured it with my Eye One.  I own both the Philips 
fluorescents and Solux bulbs and I prefer the Philips.  Softer more 
even light for viewing.  I also have them in a ceiling fixture for my 
entire office, so everything is 5000K (4700K in the case of the 
Solux).  

The Philips bulbs are made in Holland, so I'd expect them to be 
available in the UK.  The 24" fluorescent bulb (F17T8/TL950) fits any 
T8 fixture.  I bought a cheap fixture at the local Home Depot store and 
just replaced the bulb.  They also have 36 and 48 inch tubes.

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> You just gotta love the UK.  A Solux bulb costs USD 10.95 in the US.  
The
> only UK prices I have been able to find is for 4700K bulbs - GBP 
12.95 each!
> 210% of the price in the US.  Un-F*&^>"! believable.

We only pay $6.95 ea. in quantities of 5 from soluxlamps.com..... :-)
The 50W 4700K lamps seem to be the best choice of the selection.  The 5000K
is only in 35W and they don't mention the beam characteristics.  I only have
the 4700s, so I can't compare.  There is a color temp vs. voltage/life guide
at the above site.  They look so good at nominal voltage; I don't mess with
autotransformers to tweak them.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 9:27 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs

You just gotta love the UK.  A Solux bulb costs USD 10.95 in the US.  The
only UK prices I have been able to find is for 4700K bulbs - GBP 12.95 each!
210% of the price in the US.  Un-F*&^>"! believable.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>Another great light source is a fluorescent bulb made by Philips.  
>They have almost exactly 5000K temp with a 98CRI. 
>I bought a cheap fixture at the local Home Depot store and 
>just replaced the bulb.  They also have 36 and 48 inch tubes.

Same here.  I use 48" tubes made by GE called "Sunshine - Full
Spectrum Light" from Home Depot, 5000k, 90CRI, 2250 Lumens, cost
$6.95.  There are two 2-tube fixtures in my work room which is
10'x12'.  So that's 9000 Lumens for 120 SqFt, or 75 Lumens/SqFt.  It's
been very satisfactory lighting for printing


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Louis Dina wrote:
> Steve,
> 
> Another great light source is a fluorescent bulb made by Philips.  They 
> have almost exactly 5000K temp with a 98CRI. It doesn't get much better 
> than that.  I've measured it with my Eye One.  I own both the Philips 
> fluorescents and Solux bulbs and I prefer the Philips.  Softer more 
> even light for viewing.  I also have them in a ceiling fixture for my 
> entire office, so everything is 5000K (4700K in the case of the 
> Solux).  
> 
> The Philips bulbs are made in Holland, so I'd expect them to be 
> available in the UK.  The 24" fluorescent bulb (F17T8/TL950) fits any 
> T8 fixture.  I bought a cheap fixture at the local Home Depot store and 
> just replaced the bulb.  They also have 36 and 48 inch tubes.
> 
> Lou

I have the same Philips fluorescents in the print room but 36W 
length.

Some comments:
Philips has nice high color quality fluorescents but finding 
compact versions of the same quality also made by Philips 
seems to be impossible. They had a shorter tube like compact 
but that's also no longer available.
I'm using the True-Lite compact made in Greece, another type 
is advertised here:
http://www.fotoflits.nl/index.php?cPath=29&osCsid=d4b9d40d6d669c4d8866269d146d667f
There are few galleries around that have 5000K lighting so 
while I compare the prints, proofs with the 5000K lights I 
also have a 500 watt halogen lamp facing the ceiling for a 
final check with that 3200K light mixed with the fluorescents 
5000K what it might look like in a gallery.

I'm wondering how good 5000K LED lamps are meanwhile. NEC uses 
arrays of LED lamps behind their LCD screens that allow some 
color control (RGB LEDs) but there are several white 5000K 
LEDs for sale already. The color quality isn't more than 75 
CRI thought. It would be an ideal lamp as it keeps its quality 
much longer than tungsten or fluorescent lamps, uses little 
energy, cool and small size.


                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

I pay $6.95 for my Solux bulbs here: http://www.usalight.com/bulbs/soluxbulbs.htm?
cart=113008321812896877

and they last forever.  In my Gallery, out of about 30 Solux bulbs, I have had only 3 go out 
in the past year!  The majority are on 8 hours a day for 5 days a week BUT 6 are on day 
and night everyday... for a whole year now!  They are well worth the $$$'s plus, of course, 
almost no UV emmision and full spectrum output.

Tariq


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

>
> You just gotta love the UK.  A Solux bulb costs USD 10.95 in the US.  The
> only UK prices I have been able to find is for 4700K bulbs - GBP 12.95 each!
> 210% of the price in the US.  Un-F*&^>"! believable.
> 
> 
> > From: Steve Kale <stevekale@b...>
> 
> > 
> > Thanks for the link.  I didn't realise you can buy D50 bulbs that will fit
> > into normal Halogen ceiling lighting.  Do you know if the pins are the thin
> > version?  Hard to tell from the picture.  I should give them a call. They're
> > not much more expensive than regular halogen bulbs here in London.
> > 
> > 
> > My LCD must be getting old...the damn things just keep getting better!  My
> > 2x2.5Ghz G5 just got creamed by the new Quad G5 also...  :-(
> > 
> >> From: John Moody <moodymz3@y...>
> 
> >> 
> >> I have been pleased with the SoLux 4700oK Task Lamp.
> >> https://www.nleinternet.net/solux/cgi-bin/tlistore/19115.html  info at
> >> http://www.solux.net/
> >> It's a nice desk lamp with a quality diffuser, and has excellent color.
> >> 
> >> I also have fixtures with the same 4700 SoLux lamp, without the diffuser.
> >> The light output is not nearly as nice.
> >> 
> >> They say, "For all Canadian and International orders please call or email us
> >> at 800-254-4487 or soluxlamps@a..."
> >> 
> >> (BTW, my middle grade LCD (213t) BP/WP is L*=2.3 L*=126, so no dynamic range
> >> problem.)
> >> 
> >> Best regards,
> >> John Moody
>

Thanks to all those who posted those lovely US prices.  Feeling just great
here!  I would prefer to simply replace the halogen bulbs in my work room
rather than buying a lamp.  While it may not be the ideal I think it's
likely a good compromise with aesthetics.  If anyone knows a good source of
5000K halogen bulbs (the common 50mm size) then I'd appreciate it else I'm
adding light bulbs to my next US visit shopping list.


Cheers


Steve

Sorry, I meant to say a good UK source...(if such a thing exists)

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:54:31 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs
> 
> Thanks to all those who posted those lovely US prices.  Feeling just great
> here!  I would prefer to simply replace the halogen bulbs in my work room
> rather than buying a lamp.  While it may not be the ideal I think it's
> likely a good compromise with aesthetics.  If anyone knows a good source of
> 5000K halogen bulbs (the common 50mm size) then I'd appreciate it else I'm
> adding light bulbs to my next US visit shopping list.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
> Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:
>
> That gets a bit circular doesn't it? The first question is does the scaling
> make sense and then the second is whether the soft proof implementation was
> done correctly.  One could get a match between display and print but still
> not have a visually appealing result in print.

Lost me there. It seems to me the point of much of this (I admitt to ADD with regard to 
this thread) is to get to a point of wysiwyg. When that is in order, now it's up to you to 
make it pleasing. That's the way it's working here anyway.

...
> I still have a tough time with the soft proofs though.  The black point
> shift on screen seems excessive....
...
> (BTW it is interesting to note that the dynamic range we can achieve in B&W
> on photo paper now exceeds a quality display.  You can't soft proof the
> print range!)

I think you can (or get very close), and soft-proof's implementation needs a little more 
work. I think it's conceptually sound.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:
>
> Agreed.  Since I have been a participant on this forum, the question of
> "what should we really be linearizing to" has been one of the deeper
> recurring questions.  I think the fall-back to linearizing L* hasn't really
> been that understood. 

I don't think this issue has quite the import you give it. Linearizing to L is done with QTR, 
sounds like Paul may be doing it, but it's hardly a standard. StudioPrint lets you linearize 
to contunuously variable and selectable dot gain percentage, I don't recall what Colorburst 
linearizes to. Every RIP (there are many) or calabratable driver may have it's own standard.

> The net-net of what we have learnt on this exercise
> is that, for a given workspace, one is likely best to target a
> "linearization" that generates a luminance curve that reflects bpc and wtpt
> scaling - rather than a straight (linear) line.  

If you mean it porportionally compensates for paper white and ink black, I'm sure that's 
right. It is from my experience. But BPC is a different math entirely from what I 
understand. We had this conversation long ago.

Regarding the rest, linearization and color management are two different functions. In 
fact, if good color management practice is used throughout, it could be agued that the 
results would be the same no matter what standard was chosen for linearization, within 
reason of course.

Linearizatioon puts the output system into a manageable state, color management lets you 
manage it however you like.
Tyler

Hi Tyler

All I meant was that one could have a transfer function that didn't make
sense (say, clipped the bottom 1/3 of the pixels) but the wysiwyg would
still work.  We need to construct a transform that correctly implements a
sensible, rationally defendable, approach to the dynamic range compression
and then make sure the soft proof is done properly.  Getting wysiwyg doesn't
tell you whether you have sound starting point based on the "science" of it
all or whether that that "science" has been correctly deployed.  I think two
goals need to be met and the first could be regarded as more important:  1.
a sensible automated management of tonal compression, and 2. a good soft
proof.  We've had 2 for some time.  1 is a new arrival and is embedded in
the calculations done by QTR Create ICC prior to writing the ICC profile.
There'd be no sense having to always correct stupid tonal compression even
if we could clearly soft proof its damage.  Clearly it is automated and
while based on a very sensible approach it does obviate the need for human
subjective approval and, if necessary, tweaking.

Steve

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:49:44 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> That gets a bit circular doesn't it? The first question is does the scaling
>> make sense and then the second is whether the soft proof implementation was
>> done correctly.  One could get a match between display and print but still
>> not have a visually appealing result in print.
> 
> Lost me there. It seems to me the point of much of this (I admitt to ADD with
> regard to 
> this thread) is to get to a point of wysiwyg. When that is in order, now it's
> up to you to 
> make it pleasing. That's the way it's working here anyway.
> 
> ...
>> I still have a tough time with the soft proofs though.  The black point
>> shift on screen seems excessive....
> ...
>> (BTW it is interesting to note that the dynamic range we can achieve in B&W
>> on photo paper now exceeds a quality display.  You can't soft proof the
>> print range!)
> 
> I think you can (or get very close), and soft-proof's implementation needs a
> little more 
> work. I think it's conceptually sound.
> Tyler
>

I'm saying that no matter what the characteristics of the driver (this includes it's linearized 
state) a profile to profile conversion will make those unique characteristics nearly 
irrelevant. Therefore the particulars of the linearization standard become less important. 
This can be witnessed by the wide variety and undesirable non-linear nature of Epson 
drivers, but when well profiled will all print very much the same given ink/media similarity. 
Obviously at a certain point of "bad" behavior a profile conversion will only be able to do 
so much, and it breaks down.
Given your extreme example, if the badly behaving device is well profiled, some of those 
problems will be taken care of at the profile conversion point, and what isn't I can deal 
with in soft proof. Clearly though, "linearizing" that behavior out to begin with would be 
best...
I'm just saying in a CM workflow, the standard becomes less important, the profile 
conversion will become very important. In a non CM workflow, obvioulsy everything 
changes.
T
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

>
> Hi Tyler
> 
> All I meant was that one could have a transfer function that didn't make
> sense (say, clipped the bottom 1/3 of the pixels) but the wysiwyg would
> still work.  We need to construct a transform that correctly implements a
> sensible, rationally defendable, approach to the dynamic range compression
> and then make sure the soft proof is done properly.  Getting wysiwyg doesn't
> tell you whether you have sound starting point based on the "science" of it
> all or whether that that "science" has been correctly deployed.  I think two
> goals need to be met and the first could be regarded as more important:  1.
> a sensible automated management of tonal compression, and 2. a good soft
> proof.  We've had 2 for some time.  1 is a new arrival and is embedded in
> the calculations done by QTR Create ICC prior to writing the ICC profile.
> There'd be no sense having to always correct stupid tonal compression even
> if we could clearly soft proof its damage.  Clearly it is automated and
> while based on a very sensible approach it does obviate the need for human
> subjective approval and, if necessary, tweaking.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> > From: Tyler Boley <tyler@t...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:49:44 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> > <stevekale@b...> 
> > wrote:
> >> 
> >> That gets a bit circular doesn't it? The first question is does the scaling
> >> make sense and then the second is whether the soft proof implementation was
> >> done correctly.  One could get a match between display and print but still
> >> not have a visually appealing result in print.
> > 
> > Lost me there. It seems to me the point of much of this (I admitt to ADD with
> > regard to 
> > this thread) is to get to a point of wysiwyg. When that is in order, now it's
> > up to you to 
> > make it pleasing. That's the way it's working here anyway.
> > 
> > ...
> >> I still have a tough time with the soft proofs though.  The black point
> >> shift on screen seems excessive....
> > ...
> >> (BTW it is interesting to note that the dynamic range we can achieve in B&W
> >> on photo paper now exceeds a quality display.  You can't soft proof the
> >> print range!)
> > 
> > I think you can (or get very close), and soft-proof's implementation needs a
> > little more 
> > work. I think it's conceptually sound.
> > Tyler
> >
>

Except that I am talking about the mechanism which does the "profile
conversion".  This had to be formulated and then programmed.  You are
assuming this as a given - that it is both sound in terms of the principles
it attempts to apply and that it applies them properly.  I agree a good
profile made with an application which deploys good "profile conversion"
algorithms can correct for certain (up to a limit) anomalies in the "state"
of the driver.  The key point is that its algorithms work well, ie they make
sense are applied properly.

In this case Roy had to identify and then program into QTR create ICC the
manipulations performed on the measurement data which is fed to QTR Create
ICC.  Initial versions weren't operating properly because the wtpt flag was
incorrect.  Then they didn't work properly because we had not identified
that the measured data had to be scaled for media relativity.  The formula
for this scaling is part of the ICC spec and so this wasn't too hard to fix
- once the problem was identified.  At the other end, Roy found that he
could not get Adobe BPC to work with the new LUT based profiles (it seems
odd that he couldn't) and so had to embed the necessary bkpt scaling into
the profile ie he had to perform another manipulation to the measured data
prior to its inclusion in the profile.  There is very little information
available on exactly how Adobe BPC is done. (It is not part of the ICC
spec.)  If any of these computations were done improperly then the profile
would be improper.  But you'd still get wysiwyg because the same profile is
used for printing and proofing.

Therefore I am simply saying that wysiwyg is not a proof that the transform
being deployed is sound or soundly deployed.


> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 19:56:34 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> I'm saying that no matter what the characteristics of the driver (this
> includes it's linearized
> state) a profile to profile conversion will make those unique characteristics
> nearly 
> irrelevant. Therefore the particulars of the linearization standard become
> less important. 
> This can be witnessed by the wide variety and undesirable non-linear nature of
> Epson 
> drivers, but when well profiled will all print very much the same given
> ink/media similarity.
> Obviously at a certain point of "bad" behavior a profile conversion will only
> be able to do 
> so much, and it breaks down.
> Given your extreme example, if the badly behaving device is well profiled,

I did not say the device was behaving badly but rather the profile algorithm
was improper.  You can have a well behaved device and even good measurement
input for the profile but if the profile clips the data because its bpc its
"incorrect" then you are not going to get very far.

> some of those 
> problems will be taken care of at the profile conversion point, and what isn't
> I can deal 
> with in soft proof. Clearly though, "linearizing" that behavior out to begin
> with would be 
> best...
> I'm just saying in a CM workflow, the standard becomes less important, the
> profile 
> conversion will become very important.

I am simply saying that one needs to test the sensibility and implementation
of the computation that manages the differences in tonal range response.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> Except that I am talking about the mechanism which does the "profile
> conversion". 

My apologies, I thought you were talking about the need for a RIP/driver linearization 
standard. Profile conversion is a different animal entirely.
I'm not familiar with the guts of how Roy's program builds profiles, so I can't comment on the 
rest.
T

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>

> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> Agreed.  Since I have been a participant on this forum, the question of
>> "what should we really be linearizing to" has been one of the deeper
>> recurring questions.  I think the fall-back to linearizing L* hasn't really
>> been that understood.
> 
> I don't think this issue has quite the import you give it. Linearizing to L is
> done with QTR, 
> sounds like Paul may be doing it,

Paul targets his own luminance scale (linear or not).

>but it's hardly a standard. StudioPrint lets
> you linearize 
> to contunuously variable and selectable dot gain percentage, I don't recall
> what Colorburst 
> linearizes to. Every RIP (there are many) or calabratable driver may have it's
> own standard.

OK.  I had simply observed that whenever this conversation cropped up on
this forum people seemed to settle back on a linear L*.  In September of
last year I began questioning the sensibility of this.
> 
>> The net-net of what we have learnt on this exercise
>> is that, for a given workspace, one is likely best to target a
>> "linearization" that generates a luminance curve that reflects bpc and wtpt
>> scaling - rather than a straight (linear) line.
> 
> If you mean it porportionally compensates for paper white and ink black, I'm
> sure that's 
> right. It is from my experience.


>But BPC is a different math entirely from what I understand.

Not really.  I am sure Roy could comment more accurately on the specifics of
Adobe's bpc maths - as we understand it - but it is comparable to wtpt
scaling.  There is no ink black compensation in the ICC spec.  Adobe's bpc
feature (and presumably those of other similar applications) fill a gap in
the spec.  

>We had this conversation long ago.



> 
> Regarding the rest, linearization and color management are two different
> functions. In 
> fact, if good color management practice is used throughout, it could be agued
> that the 
> results would be the same no matter what standard was chosen for
> linearization, within
> reason of course.

Yes linearization is simply a calibration feature that makes a device such
as a printer perform in a more predictable fashion.  This makes colour
management easier because colour management necessarily involves
interpolation between samples because to record the complete set of
stimulus-response behaviour is impracticable.  But if you stop at
linearization and don't employ a mechanism for managing differences in tonal
response then problems arise.  Your _printer device_ may still behave
predictably but workflow results will vary to the extent that different,
say, different work spaces are used.  And for any given workspace the result
may not be sensible in that it's not visually pleasing.  For at least the
last three years this is where the B&W community largely stopped (with a few
notable ICC colour managed approaches).  What's more, those that maintained
a policy of linearising L* provided no attempt to rationalise the tonal
mapping from even just one workspace to that of the printer.  I am glad we
now have available to us an affordable solution systematically and sensibly
managing differences in tonal range.  We are finally making use of what's
been known to the colour community for quite some time.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> wrote:
snip...
> > If you mean it porportionally compensates for paper white and ink black, I'm
> > sure that's 
> > right. It is from my experience.
> 
> 
> >But BPC is a different math entirely from what I understand.
> 
> Not really.  I am sure Roy could comment more accurately on the specifics of
> Adobe's bpc maths - as we understand it - but it is comparable to wtpt
> scaling.  There is no ink black compensation in the ICC spec.  Adobe's bpc
> feature (and presumably those of other similar applications) fill a gap in
> the spec.  

Again, I thought we were discussing linearization. My apologies. Linearization has nothing to 
do with ICC specs.

Tyler

Tyler

No need to apologise.  We were talking linearization in the sense that I made the comment 
that a linear L* "linearization" may not be optimal.  If it is to be followed with colour 
management then it is.  (As you note it becomes somewhat less important but true 
linearity is very helpful.)  But if not, as has been the case up until recently in B&W, then 
one would question the sensibility of linear L* and promote in its place a "linearization" 
that reflected white and black point luminance scaling for a mandated workspace (which I 
nicknamed "smart linearization").  (The linearization would only be valid for one workspace 
for reasons we've already covered.)  So in the context of historical conversations about 
best-practice linearization (when there was no opportunity for colour management to 
follow), what I had sensed as a general agreement or fallback to  linear L* was improper 
and would have been best replaced by  "smart linearization" or something similar.  If I 
were a RIP designer and did not wish to attempt to match QTR Create ICC, I would at least 
want to provide a linearization option which, assuming a particular workspace, performed 
BPC and wtpt scaling to result in a L* profile that was indeed not linear but rather curved.  
(Indeed if I had, say, a 7 grey inkset I were promoting for use - without colour 
management - with a set of provided "linearised" curves I would build into those curves 
the luminance curvature I'm talking about.)  If we simply stop at linear L* then there exists 
a need for colour or, in our case, luminance management.

Cheers

Steve




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> wrote:
>

> Again, I thought we were discussing linearization. My apologies. Linearization has 
nothing to 

> do with ICC specs.
> 
> Tyler
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:
>...For at least the
> last three years this is where the B&W community largely stopped (with a few
> notable ICC colour managed approaches).  What's more, those that maintained
> a policy of linearising L* provided no attempt to rationalise the tonal
> mapping from even just one workspace to that of the printer.  I am glad we
> now have available to us an affordable solution systematically and sensibly
> managing differences in tonal range.  We are finally making use of what's
> been known to the colour community for quite some time.
>
This does little to aknowledge the accomplishments of so many that have contributed to 
the current state of the art. I became aware of much of this in 1998, and many were 
probably involved way before. Contributors as diverse as Dan Culbertson, Jon Cone, our 
own Ernst, up to Carl and Roy have been implementing color management, and/or using 
color management tools to move forward digital monochromatic printing. Many others 
that fail to imediately come to mind. I myself made my own CMYK profile for a quad ink 
set, that partitioned, and previewed, back in 2000 I believe, of course because of the help 
of many of those people.
This stuff isn't new.

In the course of this thread though, I still don't have a good idea of what you are trying to 
do. All this stuff works, we can work up a file on the computer, and print it getting 
predictable result on paper. I'm not sure how much more we can ask for in the workflow 
area. What is not working for you?
T

+> ...
> >> ... the question of "what should we really be linearizing to" 
> >> has been one of the deeper recurring questions.  I think the 
> >> fall-back to linearizing L* hasn't really been that understood.

> > I don't think this issue has quite the import you give it. 
> > Linearizing to L is done with QTR, sounds like Paul may be doing it,
 
> Paul targets his own luminance scale (linear or not).

It's linear to L for a matte paper with a dmax of 1.68.  That is, if one
makes a graph with the step wedge grayscale percentages on the horizontal
axis, Lab L at even steps on the vertical axis (the visual density numbers
that equal the Lab L equivalents would not be in even steps), then the
(grayscale %, Lab L) dots on the graph make a reasonably straight line with
the 50% point in the middle at lab L = 56.6.

Where I have diverged from Lab is that I continue to put the 50% point at
that L = 56.6 or density 0.61 no matter what the dmax or dmin.  I think this
makes for images that will print on both glossy and matte papers without
having to alter the files.  The additional glossy paper compression is
mostly in the dark shadow tones because they most often are wiped out by
reflections anyway.


> > but it's hardly a standard. 

I got there empirically based on my wanting to keep my files made for the
PiezoBW system printing consistently.  I, frankly, didn't care or even know
about Lab at the time.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@t...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> 
> wrote:
> >
> > That gets a bit circular doesn't it? The first question is does 
the scaling
> > make sense and then the second is whether the soft proof 
implementation was
> > done correctly.  One could get a match between display and print 
but still
> > not have a visually appealing result in print.
> 
> Lost me there. It seems to me the point of much of this (I admitt 
to ADD with regard to 
> this thread) is to get to a point of wysiwyg. When that is in 
order, now it's up to you to 
> make it pleasing. That's the way it's working here anyway.
> 
> ...
> > I still have a tough time with the soft proofs though.  The black 
point
> > shift on screen seems excessive....
> ...
> > (BTW it is interesting to note that the dynamic range we can 
achieve in B&W
> > on photo paper now exceeds a quality display.  You can't soft 
proof the
> > print range!)
> 
> I think you can (or get very close), and soft-proof's 
implementation needs a little more 

> work. I think it's conceptually sound.
> Tyler
>

If I were a RIP designer who could work from scratch with all 
the input over the years of lists like this I would look for a 
printer calibration method that would consider the native 
behaviour of the printer and what realistic standard was 
possible with that behaviour plus at the same time check what 
fitted color management on top of that standard best. If all 
the perceptual curves of different papers + BPC etc result in 
a space that isn't a too complex shape it must be possible to 
find the average 3D curve within that shape and use that as 
the calibration standard. Building the profiles on that should 
theoretically allow a better fit from the native behaviour of 
the printer up to the color management.

To give an analogy, if you have a metal cloth hanger with a 
shape you like to alter you could first start to make the wire 
frame straight and after that bend it to the shape you want. 
Measuring is easier then. You could also look whether the 
original shape has elements that come close to the desired 
shape and just alter the differences. Less bending needed but 
a more complex shape model to build on. Depends on the 
original shape and the desired shape which method is best.

If I were a RIP designer who had a RIP working as nice as QTR 
I would take care not to go on paths unknown. And Roy may even 
know that those paths are actually dead ends. For me it is an 
abstract model, Roy will now the numbers.

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

Tyler

It finally works very well.

I am not at all refusing to acknowledge the accomplishments of so many.
Rather I am praising the very significant progress this represents.  Other
than Imageprint's ICC approach, this is the first "colour-managed" approach
to B&W tonal range management discussed on this forum in the last three
years.  There have been expressed desires, hopes and wishes - but no
implementation.  Yes we have used colour management tools to do proofing but
not for the much more critical management of tonal range.  In the last three
years (other than the discussion building towards QTR Create ICC) there has
been no progress made in the dynamic management of tonal compression other
than to suggest people do an "s-curve".

QTR Create ICC finally takes knowledge that has been available to the colour
world for many years and applies it to B&W.  This is fantastic.

My point was simply to say that even if one didn't have the ability to
deploy a general, colour-managed approach such as QTR Create ICC, one can
achieve the same result with as much rigour for any given workspace by
deploying a "smart(er) linearization".  It's a pity we didn't.  But in the
end we leapfrogged to a workflow (QTR ICC) that works for any workspace -
all's well that ends well.

Congratulations Roy and thanks very much for all the hard work over the last
year.

Steve

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>

> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> 
> wrote:
>> ...For at least the
>> last three years this is where the B&W community largely stopped (with a few
>> notable ICC colour managed approaches).  What's more, those that maintained
>> a policy of linearising L* provided no attempt to rationalise the tonal
>> mapping from even just one workspace to that of the printer.  I am glad we
>> now have available to us an affordable solution systematically and sensibly
>> managing differences in tonal range.  We are finally making use of what's
>> been known to the colour community for quite some time.
>> 
> This does little to aknowledge the accomplishments of so many that have
> contributed to 
> the current state of the art. I became aware of much of this in 1998, and many
> were 
> probably involved way before. Contributors as diverse as Dan Culbertson, Jon
> Cone, our 
> own Ernst, up to Carl and Roy have been implementing color management, and/or
> using 
> color management tools to move forward digital monochromatic printing. Many
> others 
> that fail to imediately come to mind. I myself made my own CMYK profile for a
> quad ink 
> set, that partitioned, and previewed, back in 2000 I believe, of course
> because of the help
> of many of those people.
> This stuff isn't new.
> 
> In the course of this thread though, I still don't have a good idea of what
> you are trying to
> do. All this stuff works, we can work up a file on the computer, and print it
> getting 
> predictable result on paper. I'm not sure how much more we can ask for in the
> workflow 
> area. What is not working for you?
> T

Thanks for the part number.
I see the Philips TL-90 series T8 lamps do have a 98 CRI, wow.  Looking at
the spectrum, it’s clear these have very different phosphors than the other
high CRI fluorescents.  I always trusted Solux with the 99.35 CRI, but I
will give these a try, thanks.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Louis Dina
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 10:38 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs

Steve,

Another great light source is a fluorescent bulb made by Philips.  They
have almost exactly 5000K temp with a 98CRI. It doesn't get much better
than that.  I've measured it with my Eye One.  I own both the Philips
fluorescents and Solux bulbs and I prefer the Philips.  Softer more
even light for viewing.  I also have them in a ceiling fixture for my
entire office, so everything is 5000K (4700K in the case of the
Solux).

The Philips bulbs are made in Holland, so I'd expect them to be
available in the UK.  The 24" fluorescent bulb (F17T8/TL950) fits any
T8 fixture.  I bought a cheap fixture at the local Home Depot store and
just replaced the bulb.  They also have 36 and 48 inch tubes.

Lou




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

For UK listeners, Solux bulbs (2in/51mm dichroic halogen - just like common
halogen ceiling lights) are available from two distributors:

http://www.triwholesale.co.uk/solux.htm

http://www.outsidein.co.uk

I would not recommend the latter unless you enjoy being raped.  They list
their price as £12.95 per bulb whereas TRI Wholesale's price is £7.95 (with
discounts available for bulk)!  Either way they are both a long way from
$6.95 a bulb in the US....

Note that the lamps allow specific percentages of wavelengths to “leak” out
the back of the reflector by design.  If you are not using a solux fixture,
make sure your fixture does not reflect them back to the surface being
illuminated.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 7:38 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs

For UK listeners, Solux bulbs (2in/51mm dichroic halogen - just like common
halogen ceiling lights) are available from two distributors:

http://www.triwholesale.co.uk/solux.htm

http://www.outsidein.co.uk

I would not recommend the latter unless you enjoy being raped.  They list
their price as £12.95 per bulb whereas TRI Wholesale's price is £7.95 (with
discounts available for bulk)!  Either way they are both a long way from
$6.95 a bulb in the US....







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 “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” 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 “OWNER” AND
“MODERATORS” 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  “OWNER” AND
“MODERATORS” 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




SPONSORED LINKS
Digital wedding photography
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+
wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+coll
ege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photog
raphy+course&c=6&%20>
Learn digital photography
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+we
dding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+colleg
e&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photogra
phy+course&c=6&s=%20>
Digital photography college
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+
wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+coll
ege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photog
raphy+course&c=6&%20>
Digital photography
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+
photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=D
igital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+co
urse&c=6&s=188&.s%20>
Digital photography web site
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital
+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+col
lege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photo
graphy+course&c=6%20>
Digital photography course
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+w
edding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+colle
ge&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photogr
aphy+course&c=6&s%20>

  _____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

*          Visit your group " DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint> " on the web.

*          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Uns
ubscribe>

*          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

  _____



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>QTR Create ICC finally takes >knowledge that has been available to >the 
>colour
>world for many years and applies it to >B&W.  This is fantastic.

Could you or someone else tell me what equipment (hardware and software) is 
needed in order to use this feature of QTR? I keep reading about i1. Is that 
the only thing that can be used or is it the best thing or are there other 
things that can be used equally well (and that hopefully might cost less 
than i1)? In particular, can a plain old reflection densitometer be used or 
is something more than that required? Finally, once you're set up to use ICC 
Create Profiles in QTR, can it be used to create color profiles as well as 
b&w?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 6:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver


Tyler

It finally works very well.

I am not at all refusing to acknowledge the accomplishments of so many.
Rather I am praising the very significant progress this represents.  Other
than Imageprint's ICC approach, this is the first "colour-managed" approach
to B&W tonal range management discussed on this forum in the last three
years.  There have been expressed desires, hopes and wishes - but no
implementation.  Yes we have used colour management tools to do proofing but
not for the much more critical management of tonal range.  In the last three
years (other than the discussion building towards QTR Create ICC) there has
been no progress made in the dynamic management of tonal compression other
than to suggest people do an "s-curve".

QTR Create ICC finally takes knowledge that has been available to the colour
world for many years and applies it to B&W.  This is fantastic.

My point was simply to say that even if one didn't have the ability to
deploy a general, colour-managed approach such as QTR Create ICC, one can
achieve the same result with as much rigour for any given workspace by
deploying a "smart(er) linearization".  It's a pity we didn't.  But in the
end we leapfrogged to a workflow (QTR ICC) that works for any workspace -
all's well that ends well.

Congratulations Roy and thanks very much for all the hard work over the last
year.

Steve


> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>

>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...>
> wrote:
>> ...For at least the
>> last three years this is where the B&W community largely stopped (with a 
>> few
>> notable ICC colour managed approaches).  What's more, those that 
>> maintained
>> a policy of linearising L* provided no attempt to rationalise the tonal
>> mapping from even just one workspace to that of the printer.  I am glad 
>> we
>> now have available to us an affordable solution systematically and 
>> sensibly
>> managing differences in tonal range.  We are finally making use of what's
>> been known to the colour community for quite some time.
>>
> This does little to aknowledge the accomplishments of so many that have
> contributed to
> the current state of the art. I became aware of much of this in 1998, and 
> many
> were
> probably involved way before. Contributors as diverse as Dan Culbertson, 
> Jon
> Cone, our
> own Ernst, up to Carl and Roy have been implementing color management, 
> and/or
> using
> color management tools to move forward digital monochromatic printing. 
> Many
> others
> that fail to imediately come to mind. I myself made my own CMYK profile 
> for a
> quad ink
> set, that partitioned, and previewed, back in 2000 I believe, of course
> because of the help
> of many of those people.
> This stuff isn't new.
>
> In the course of this thread though, I still don't have a good idea of 
> what
> you are trying to
> do. All this stuff works, we can work up a file on the computer, and print 
> it
> getting
> predictable result on paper. I'm not sure how much more we can ask for in 
> the
> workflow
> area. What is not working for you?
> T




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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




SPONSORED LINKS Digital wedding photography  Learn digital photography 
Digital photography college
      Digital photography  Digital photography web site  Digital photography 
course


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

  a..  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.

  b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

  c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Brian


> From: Brian Ellis <bellis60@...>

> 
> Could you or someone else tell me what equipment (hardware and software) is
> needed in order to use this feature of QTR? I keep reading about i1. Is that
> the only thing that can be used or is it the best thing or are there other
> things that can be used equally well (and that hopefully might cost less
> than i1)? 

The i1 is not the only equipment that can be used.  Any spectrophotometer
that cab export Lab data to a text file will work fine.  You just need to
get the data in the right shape which is quite easy and can be done in a
simple text editor.

>In particular, can a plain old reflection densitometer be used or
> is something more than that required?

A densitometer will work if you are simply interested in tonal range
management.  A spectrophotometer is needed to soft proof hue.
 
>Finally, once you're set up to use ICC
> Create Profiles in QTR, can it be used to create color profiles as well as
> b&w?

No it is just for B&W.


Cheers

Steve

Thanks John.

> From: John Moody <moodymz3@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:24:05 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs
> 
> Note that the lamps allow specific percentages of wavelengths to ³leak² out
> the back of the reflector by design.  If you are not using a solux fixture,
> make sure your fixture does not reflect them back to the surface being
> illuminated.
> 
> Best regards,
> John Moody

>...
> Other than Imageprint's ICC approach, ....

The sample IP5 9600 B&W step wedge prints I saw also wiped out the 95% -
100% separation. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Ernst,

I think what you're saying relates to the difference between what I've heard
referred to (by Roy, I think) as "hardware" v. "software" linearization.  In
a properly written rip or driver, the different shades are generated by
different dot or dither patterns.  As such the file values are not altered
and the number of different levels of gray is not reduced.  However, if the
adjustments to get to the final ramp are made prior to the generation of the
dot pattern, the file values that are sent to that stage are altered and, if
all file values were being used, some grayscale steps and information are
lost.

The loss of information is minimized if the curve shape is mild, and, of
course, high bit depth minimizes the problem.

However, to the extent possible, to preserve as much information as
possible, we'd like as much of the work done with the dot/dither pattern as
possible.  For example, I recommend in the "EZ" approaches that the driver
controls first be use to achieve the best ramp.  Only when that is not quite
right do I recommend a curve, transfer function, or maybe ICC (if the ramp
toe problems can be fixed).  I think Roy recommends that the QTR curves be
as accurate as possible before one relies on an ICC linearization step.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ernst
> Dinkla
> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 1:02 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> If I were a RIP designer who could work from scratch with all
> the input over the years of lists like this I would look for a
> printer calibration method that would consider the native
> behaviour of the printer and what realistic standard was
> possible with that behaviour plus at the same time check what
> fitted color management on top of that standard best. If all
> the perceptual curves of different papers + BPC etc result in
> a space that isn't a too complex shape it must be possible to
> find the average 3D curve within that shape and use that as
> the calibration standard. Building the profiles on that should
> theoretically allow a better fit from the native behaviour of
> the printer up to the color management.
> 
> To give an analogy, if you have a metal cloth hanger with a
> shape you like to alter you could first start to make the wire
> frame straight and after that bend it to the shape you want.
> Measuring is easier then. You could also look whether the
> original shape has elements that come close to the desired
> shape and just alter the differences. Less bending needed but
> a more complex shape model to build on. Depends on the
> original shape and the desired shape which method is best.
> 
> If I were a RIP designer who had a RIP working as nice as QTR
> I would take care not to go on paths unknown. And Roy may even
> know that those paths are actually dead ends. For me it is an
> abstract model, Roy will now the numbers.
> 
>                     --
>            Ernst Dinkla
> 
> 
> www.pigment-print.com
> (         unvollendet         )
> 
> 
> 
> 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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" 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
> "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Thanks Steve. You said "Any spectrophotometer
that can export Lab data to a text file will work fine."  I've looked on 
ebay and see a whole bunch of spectrophotometers for sale. I know nothing 
about spectrophotometers so please bear with me here. I'm unclear how to go 
about determining whether any particular one  will "export lab data to a 
text file" and otherwise will work with QTR. The obvious answer is "ask the 
seller" except that the sellers talk about sampling paint and things like 
that, certainly not QTR or even photography. Is there some magic question I 
could ask  that is likely to be understood by the typical stectrophotometer 
owner or is transmitting Lab data such a common function of a 
spectrophotometer that most of them would know what I'm talking about?

Thanks for any help you or anyone else can give. I already have a useless 
transmission densitometer  sitting in my garage. I don't want to add a 
spectrophotometer to the collection if I can avoid it.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver


Hi Brian


> From: Brian Ellis <bellis60@...>

>
> Could you or someone else tell me what equipment (hardware and software) 
> is
> needed in order to use this feature of QTR? I keep reading about i1. Is 
> that
> the only thing that can be used or is it the best thing or are there other
> things that can be used equally well (and that hopefully might cost less
> than i1)?

The i1 is not the only equipment that can be used.  Any spectrophotometer
that cab export Lab data to a text file will work fine.  You just need to
get the data in the right shape which is quite easy and can be done in a
simple text editor.

>In particular, can a plain old reflection densitometer be used or
> is something more than that required?

A densitometer will work if you are simply interested in tonal range
management.  A spectrophotometer is needed to soft proof hue.

>Finally, once you're set up to use ICC
> Create Profiles in QTR, can it be used to create color profiles as well as
> b&w?

No it is just for B&W.


Cheers

Steve




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 "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" 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 "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




SPONSORED LINKS Digital wedding photography  Learn digital photography 
Digital photography college
      Digital photography  Digital photography web site  Digital photography 
course


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

  a..  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.

  b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

  c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> Tyler
> 
> It finally works very well.
> 
> I am not at all refusing to acknowledge the accomplishments of so many.
> Rather I am praising the very significant progress this represents.
 Other
> than Imageprint's ICC approach, this is the first "colour-managed"
approach
> to B&W tonal range management discussed on this forum in the last three
> years.

I'm afraid that says more about the list activity than anything else.
There's a lot going on in the rest of the world.

>  There have been expressed desires, hopes and wishes - but no
> implementation.

PiezographyBW ICC was introduced in 2003. I have one friend that has
been using it on an 1160 since then, another on a 1280. Both make
beautiful prints, both use soft proof  effectively and print through
the profiles.
iQuads came out in 2004, they are essentially a custom version of the
same thing.
I'm selecting these products to mention not to hype them in
particular, but to show just one example of significant implementation.

> Yes we have used colour management tools to do proofing but
> not for the much more critical management of tonal range. 

I don't find that to be as critically necessary as you. In fact I
don't currently utilize a profile conversion in my printing data path
for B&W printing. Many don't and are doing fine.

> In the last three
> years (other than the discussion building towards QTR Create ICC)
there has
> been no progress made in the dynamic management of tonal compression
other
> than to suggest people do an "s-curve".
> 
> QTR Create ICC finally takes knowledge that has been available to
the colour
> world for many years and applies it to B&W.  This is fantastic.
> 
> My point was simply to say that even if one didn't have the ability to
> deploy a general, colour-managed approach such as QTR Create ICC,
one can
> achieve the same result with as much rigour for any given workspace by
> deploying a "smart(er) linearization".  It's a pity we didn't.  But
in the
> end we leapfrogged to a workflow (QTR ICC) that works for any
workspace -
> all's well that ends well.

Honestly, you lose me here, and I think I'm just done with the
conversation. I don't know who all these "we" folks are. The
apparently dumb and pitiful linearization I and many others are using
seems to be dandy and ended well some time ago.

> Congratulations Roy and thanks very much for all the hard work over
the last
> year.

Well of course.
T

Brian 

I am sorry but I am not familiar with the various brands available out
there.  Others here can suggest good, reliable brands and models that will
have the right specs and then you can see if you can find a used one for
sale.  I think it's better to find a few models that fit the bill and look
for them rather than trying to see if the myriad of options currently for
sale will.

Steve

> From: Brian Ellis <bellis60@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:59:38 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> Thanks Steve. You said "Any spectrophotometer
> that can export Lab data to a text file will work fine."  I've looked on
> ebay and see a whole bunch of spectrophotometers for sale. I know nothing
> about spectrophotometers so please bear with me here. I'm unclear how to go
> about determining whether any particular one  will "export lab data to a
> text file" and otherwise will work with QTR. The obvious answer is "ask the
> seller" except that the sellers talk about sampling paint and things like
> that, certainly not QTR or even photography. Is there some magic question I
> could ask  that is likely to be understood by the typical stectrophotometer
> owner or is transmitting Lab data such a common function of a
> spectrophotometer that most of them would know what I'm talking about?
> 
> Thanks for any help you or anyone else can give. I already have a useless
> transmission densitometer  sitting in my garage. I don't want to add a
> spectrophotometer to the collection if I can avoid it.

I am not at all refusing to acknowledge the accomplishments of so many.
> Rather I am praising the very significant progress this represents.
Other
> than Imageprint's ICC approach, this is the first "colour-managed"
approach
> to B&W tonal range management discussed on this forum in the last three
> years.

Why do you say IP's approach to b&w is ICC.  It's not.  You can not use IP's b&w "profiles" anywhere except in IP.  
 
Tom Baker


 
 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It seems I have offended you.  That was not my intention.  Please accept my
apology.

Steve

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:34:06 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
>> 
>> Tyler
>> 
>> It finally works very well.
>> 
>> I am not at all refusing to acknowledge the accomplishments of so many.
>> Rather I am praising the very significant progress this represents.
>  Other
>> than Imageprint's ICC approach, this is the first "colour-managed"
> approach
>> to B&W tonal range management discussed on this forum in the last three
>> years.
> 
> I'm afraid that says more about the list activity than anything else.
> There's a lot going on in the rest of the world.
> 
>>  There have been expressed desires, hopes and wishes - but no
>> implementation.
> 
> PiezographyBW ICC was introduced in 2003. I have one friend that has
> been using it on an 1160 since then, another on a 1280. Both make
> beautiful prints, both use soft proof  effectively and print through
> the profiles.
> iQuads came out in 2004, they are essentially a custom version of the
> same thing.
> I'm selecting these products to mention not to hype them in
> particular, but to show just one example of significant implementation.
> 
>> Yes we have used colour management tools to do proofing but
>> not for the much more critical management of tonal range.
> 
> I don't find that to be as critically necessary as you. In fact I
> don't currently utilize a profile conversion in my printing data path
> for B&W printing. Many don't and are doing fine.
> 
>> In the last three
>> years (other than the discussion building towards QTR Create ICC)
> there has
>> been no progress made in the dynamic management of tonal compression
> other
>> than to suggest people do an "s-curve".
>> 
>> QTR Create ICC finally takes knowledge that has been available to
> the colour
>> world for many years and applies it to B&W.  This is fantastic.
>> 
>> My point was simply to say that even if one didn't have the ability to
>> deploy a general, colour-managed approach such as QTR Create ICC,
> one can
>> achieve the same result with as much rigour for any given workspace by
>> deploying a "smart(er) linearization".  It's a pity we didn't.  But
> in the
>> end we leapfrogged to a workflow (QTR ICC) that works for any
> workspace -
>> all's well that ends well.
> 
> Honestly, you lose me here, and I think I'm just done with the
> conversation. I don't know who all these "we" folks are. The
> apparently dumb and pitiful linearization I and many others are using
> seems to be dandy and ended well some time ago.
> 
>> Congratulations Roy and thanks very much for all the hard work over
> the last
>> year.
> 
> Well of course.
> T

Of course it is.  They profile the response of the printer driven by the IP
driver.  They only have relevance if you have that driver.  Same as a Gretag
Macbeth profile of the Epson driver's response is only relevant to that
Epson driver.  You can't profile the Imageprint driver and expect it to
represent the performance of the Epson driver.

> From: Tom Baker <tbaker1328@...>

> 
> Why do you say IP's approach to b&w is ICC.  It's not.  You can not use IP's
> b&w "profiles" anywhere except in IP.
>  
> Tom Baker

According to Colorbyte the B&W "profiles" are not "real" profiles.  They would not be recognized by any other application as an ICC profile.  Therefore, I theink applying ICC to them is a misnomer.
 
Their color profiles are recognized by any application that know about ICC profiles, but not the b&w.  
 
Tom Baker

Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:
Of course it is.  They profile the response of the printer driven by the IP
driver.  They only have relevance if you have that driver.  Same as a Gretag
Macbeth profile of the Epson driver's response is only relevant to that
Epson driver.  You can't profile the Imageprint driver and expect it to
represent the performance of the Epson driver.


> From: Tom Baker <tbaker1328@...t>

> 
> Why do you say IP's approach to b&w is ICC.  It's not.  You can not use IP's
> b&w "profiles" anywhere except in IP.
>  
> Tom Baker




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 “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” 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 “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” 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  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 


    Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
  
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


---------------------------------




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting.  Sorry I did not know that.  They can't conform to spec.
Apologies.  I guess my exception turned out not to be an exception after
all.

> From: Tom Baker <tbaker1328@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:35:21 -0700 (PDT)
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> 
> According to Colorbyte the B&W "profiles" are not "real" profiles.  They would
> not be recognized by any other application as an ICC profile.  Therefore, I
> theink applying ICC to them is a misnomer.
>  
> Their color profiles are recognized by any application that know about ICC
> profiles, but not the b&w.
>  
> Tom Baker
> 
> Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:
> Of course it is.  They profile the response of the printer driven by the IP
> driver.  They only have relevance if you have that driver.  Same as a Gretag
> Macbeth profile of the Epson driver's response is only relevant to that
> Epson driver.  You can't profile the Imageprint driver and expect it to
> represent the performance of the Epson driver.
> 
> 
>> From: Tom Baker <tbaker1328@...>
> 
>> 
>> Why do you say IP's approach to b&w is ICC.  It's not.  You can not use IP's
>> b&w "profiles" anywhere except in IP.
>>  
>> Tom Baker

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> Brian 
> 
> I am sorry but I am not familiar with the various brands available out
> there.  Others here can suggest good, reliable brands and models that 
will
> have the right specs and then you can see if you can find a used one 
for
> sale.  I think it's better to find a few models that fit the bill and 
look
> for them rather than trying to see if the myriad of options currently 
for
> sale will.


Colorimeter:

Color Savvy Color Mouse can be made to export L*a*b* to a text file, 
not as accurate as a spectro. $450 new. I have one, and the accuracy is 
not that bad (now collecting dust). They also made a Spectro version 
that sold for around $1000, but I have no experience with it.

Spectrophotometers:

- Xrite DTP22 also older Digital Swatchbook (good solid units but slow 
manual use!) Make sure the calibration standard has the same serial 
number as the spectro, or it is USELESS!!!!! Xrite will still provide 
service on the Xrite version of these DTP22 (et. al.) but not of the 
OEM versions that you might find lurking around Ebay. Complete rebuild 
is around $450. You will need the old version of ToolCrib to work with 
the Digital Swatchbook, the new version says it no longer works! I have 
a Digital Swatchbook, the accuracy compared to my i1 is very good, but 
different, it should probably go back for a check-up (now collecting 
dust).
- Xrite DTP41 and DTP45 auto scanning spectro (expensive)
- Xrite DTP70 auto scanning spectro (even more expensive)

- Gretag Eye-one (all versions of the SPECTROPHOTOMETER) not Display 
products!

There are many other much more expensive units out there, like the 
price of the DTP70 at more than several thousand dollars (DTP70=$4000+ 
new) your best bet would be to look for a used Eye-one revision A or 
earlier, there was someone selling them at the Fred Miranda forums a 
while back for around $450 each since there is a limitation to the 
upgrades available to those older models. Your next choice up the line 
would be the GMB Design, but don't think you can actually use the color 
profiles generated from the "easy" targets it includes. That package is 
just the cheapest way to buy the spectro, it will however still work on 
your monitor.

Not to drag this out, but if that were the case I would have said so.
I was making very specific points. The only real disconnect I percieve
at this point is your ideas about linearization. I don't detect a
problem here, or out there in the world, regarding linearization so my
attention can't stay with the discussion and I'm bowing out of that part.
Don't be sorry on my account.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> It seems I have offended you.  That was not my intention.  Please
accept my
> apology.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> > From: Tyler Boley <tyler@t...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:34:06 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC v. Transfer Function in Epson driver
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> > <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Tyler
> >> 
> >> It finally works very well.
> >> 
> >> I am not at all refusing to acknowledge the accomplishments of so
many.
> >> Rather I am praising the very significant progress this represents.
> >  Other
> >> than Imageprint's ICC approach, this is the first "colour-managed"
> > approach
> >> to B&W tonal range management discussed on this forum in the last
three
> >> years.
> > 
> > I'm afraid that says more about the list activity than anything else.
> > There's a lot going on in the rest of the world.
> > 
> >>  There have been expressed desires, hopes and wishes - but no
> >> implementation.
> > 
> > PiezographyBW ICC was introduced in 2003. I have one friend that has
> > been using it on an 1160 since then, another on a 1280. Both make
> > beautiful prints, both use soft proof  effectively and print through
> > the profiles.
> > iQuads came out in 2004, they are essentially a custom version of the
> > same thing.
> > I'm selecting these products to mention not to hype them in
> > particular, but to show just one example of significant
implementation.
> > 
> >> Yes we have used colour management tools to do proofing but
> >> not for the much more critical management of tonal range.
> > 
> > I don't find that to be as critically necessary as you. In fact I
> > don't currently utilize a profile conversion in my printing data path
> > for B&W printing. Many don't and are doing fine.
> > 
> >> In the last three
> >> years (other than the discussion building towards QTR Create ICC)
> > there has
> >> been no progress made in the dynamic management of tonal compression
> > other
> >> than to suggest people do an "s-curve".
> >> 
> >> QTR Create ICC finally takes knowledge that has been available to
> > the colour
> >> world for many years and applies it to B&W.  This is fantastic.
> >> 
> >> My point was simply to say that even if one didn't have the
ability to
> >> deploy a general, colour-managed approach such as QTR Create ICC,
> > one can
> >> achieve the same result with as much rigour for any given
workspace by

> >> deploying a "smart(er) linearization".  It's a pity we didn't.  But
> > in the
> >> end we leapfrogged to a workflow (QTR ICC) that works for any
> > workspace -
> >> all's well that ends well.
> > 
> > Honestly, you lose me here, and I think I'm just done with the
> > conversation. I don't know who all these "we" folks are. The
> > apparently dumb and pitiful linearization I and many others are using
> > seems to be dandy and ended well some time ago.
> > 
> >> Congratulations Roy and thanks very much for all the hard work over
> > the last
> >> year.
> > 
> > Well of course.
> > T
>

Paul Roark wrote:
> Ernst,
> 
> I think what you're saying relates to the difference between what I've heard
> referred to (by Roy, I think) as "hardware" v. "software" linearization.  In
> a properly written rip or driver, the different shades are generated by
> different dot or dither patterns.  As such the file values are not altered
> and the number of different levels of gray is not reduced.  However, if the
> adjustments to get to the final ramp are made prior to the generation of the
> dot pattern, the file values that are sent to that stage are altered and, if
> all file values were being used, some grayscale steps and information are
> lost.
> 
> The loss of information is minimized if the curve shape is mild, and, of
> course, high bit depth minimizes the problem.
> 
> However, to the extent possible, to preserve as much information as
> possible, we'd like as much of the work done with the dot/dither pattern as
> possible.  For example, I recommend in the "EZ" approaches that the driver
> controls first be use to achieve the best ramp.  Only when that is not quite
> right do I recommend a curve, transfer function, or maybe ICC (if the ramp
> toe problems can be fixed).  I think Roy recommends that the QTR curves be
> as accurate as possible before one relies on an ICC linearization step.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 

Paul,

The Colorbase discussion, Jon Cone's somewhat stealthy replies
on the K7 curves, your modeling to the eye of the RGB curves
in Photoshop and Steve's questions brought me back to how I
got quads printed with the Wasatch RIP.

At that time I used linearisation of the CMYK channels as the
base and with extra adjustment curves I fitted the partioning
to get a final result that would be near linear. I could check
but not apply that end linearity with the SpectroCam again. On
top of that a "perceptual" S curve was placed. This was a
complicated approach, partly defined by the limitation of that
RIP and my lack of knowledge. I asked Wasatch for a top
linearisation for B&W purposes but the answers were not
positive. This straightening, bending, straightening, bending
of the data is the worst example of what could happen in a
quad RIP. My philosophy was that I could at least linearise
the CMYK channels from time to time and keep the card house
above that stable.

Your RGB curves for Photoshop lacked the linearisation and
fixed the ink channel choice much more than my approach but on
the other hand you were able to do (a mind bending) one curve
step to get to the perceptually nice greyscale. It would
depend on the Epson's driver Dmax and the black box RGB-CMYK
conversion of the driver but nevertheless. I made some printer
profiles with a profile editor based on your curves.

Roy's QTR partitioning curve creation and linearisation over
the combined partitions were a good starting point. The
addition of the perceptual curve and the use of the ICC model
for that in printing, in the greyscale space and for soft
proofing where more or less brainstormed in this list.
Possibly inspired by Jon Cone's quad profiles of that time but
quite similar to how RIPs handle this for color printing. In
fact the greyscale space profile is most likely the most
innovative part of that development.  (I know that gamma 2.2
will do as well)  After that the profile creator was made.

The Colorbase discussion on whether it is a linearisation or a
calibration utility did question the underlying linear base
where the Epson driver builds on. My curiosity wasn't so much
directed to how profiling fits on the
calibration/linearisation like Steve now looks for (related to
his using of QTR's profiling tools on the Advanced B&W part of
Epson's new driver) but whether Epson uses calibration that
isn't linear but fits the native character of the printer
better and at the same time follows Steve's suggestions on how
the rest should fit on top. If this all fits like ying yang
you need milder shifts by the created profiles and by that the
total gets more stable and smoother. This concept is abstract
and I have no numbers to show. Roy is quite capable to push
the pin in the balloons I make so I will not write more on
this than I have done already.

The strange thing with the Wasatch SoftRip was that the curves
after linearisation shouldn't be seen as representing the
actual non linearity of the printer but should be seen as
special correction curves of that non linearity. The manual
said so. If that implied the creation of a non linear base to
build the rest on is something I'm now asking myself again.

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

Thanks for the links Steve I too have had a hard time tracking down these
lamps in the UK.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
  Sent: 24 October 2005 12:38
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs


  For UK listeners, Solux bulbs (2in/51mm dichroic halogen - just like
common
  halogen ceiling lights) are available from two distributors:

  http://www.triwholesale.co.uk/solux.htm

  http://www.outsidein.co.uk

  I would not recommend the latter unless you enjoy being raped.  They list
  their price as £12.95 per bulb whereas TRI Wholesale's price is £7.95
(with
  discounts available for bulk)!  Either way they are both a long way from
  $6.95 a bulb in the US....


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have called Tri Wholesale about 10 times and nobody answers.  Go figure.

> From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...>

> 
> Thanks for the links Steve I too have had a hard time tracking down these
> lamps in the UK.
> 
> William
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
>   Sent: 24 October 2005 12:38
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs
> 
> 
>   For UK listeners, Solux bulbs (2in/51mm dichroic halogen - just like
> common
>   halogen ceiling lights) are available from two distributors:
> 
>   http://www.triwholesale.co.uk/solux.htm
> 
>   http://www.outsidein.co.uk
> 
>   I would not recommend the latter unless you enjoy being raped.  They list
>   their price as £12.95 per bulb whereas TRI Wholesale's price is £7.95
> (with
>   discounts available for bulk)!  Either way they are both a long way from
>   $6.95 a bulb in the US....

William

I finally had a call back from these guys (and a long story about their phone being 
switched away from BT without their knowledge and then cut off).  The guy I spoke to 
(unfortunately I missed his name) seemed like a nice guy.  Buy 10 and you get 50p off 
immediately.  Tell him that if you like them you are in for more and you may get more off.  
I told him I may want another 20 and he knocked the price to £7 a bulb.  (Still a long way 
off US prices, even if you pay sales tax there.)

Cheers

Steve


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

>
> I have called Tri Wholesale about 10 times and nobody answers.  Go figure.
> 
> 
> > From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@b...>
> 
> > 
> > Thanks for the links Steve I too have had a hard time tracking down these
> > lamps in the UK.
> > 
> > William

BTW I did not realise that the Van Gogh museum in Amsterdam was lit with
these.  I remember visiting the museum last year and thinking it was
incredibly well lit with an amazing sense of clean bright light for an
indoor space.  I can't wait to get these things up and running in my home.
I got a couple of "daylight" bulbs from my local hardware store to try. They
are meant to be 4100K.  I replaced the two lights over my desk - they are
about 1 1/2 feet to my right and left and the desk to ceiling length is
1.6m.  Unfortunately one is producing light very different from the other.
As measured by my i1, one is producing 3900K and the other only 3100K (with
a big difference in lux as well).  But even with these two poor bulbs it is
freaky to see the impact on the room which is around 4x9m lit with 11
halogen ceiling lights.  It is somehow more relaxing to have the whiter
light around my desk.  The rest of the room now looks very very yellow!!  So
I would not recommend a partial bulb replacement.  It's no wonder they
prescribe these bulbs for seasonal affective disorder.  Given the typically
grey English winter I'd say these are a must for any halogen-lit English
home - forget about whether you are a photographer or not.

I found a supplier of the Philips tubes in the UK, and will consider
replacing all the lights in my studio and office area.

The www.thelightbulb.co.uk company say the Philips TL950 tubes are available
in:

2ft 18w
4ft 36w
5ft 58w

The Solux spots will light my gallery space in the studio, when the people
get back to me.

William


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have an RFQ in for some NeoRay fixtures to put the phillips lamps into.
They should reduce the heat load over the soluxes, which will be welcome in
the summer.  Check them out at www.cooperlighing.com
<http://www.cooperlighing.com/>  they look really nice.
They are available with no-hum, no-flicker, and dimmable electronic
ballasts.  I called Philips support and confirmed that dimming ballasts will
not harm the lamps.  Note that you need a special dimmer as well.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of William
Wilson
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 12:50 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs

I found a supplier of the Philips tubes in the UK, and will consider
replacing all the lights in my studio and office area.

The www.thelightbulb.co.uk company say the Philips TL950 tubes are available
in:

2ft 18w
4ft 36w
5ft 58w

The Solux spots will light my gallery space in the studio, when the people
get back to me.

William




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

William

Where do you live?  Maybe we should pool our purchase of the spots.  Feel
free to contact me off-list.

Steve

> From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 17:49:32 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs
> 
> I found a supplier of the Philips tubes in the UK, and will consider
> replacing all the lights in my studio and office area.
> 
> The www.thelightbulb.co.uk company say the Philips TL950 tubes are available
> in:
> 
> 2ft 18w
> 4ft 36w
> 5ft 58w
> 
> The Solux spots will light my gallery space in the studio, when the people
> get back to me.
> 
> William
> 
>

Hi Steve

I'm based in Lanark and still waiting for pricing on these, I will let you
know when I receive more info.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
  Sent: 29 October 2005 19:12
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs


  William

  Where do you live?  Maybe we should pool our purchase of the spots.  Feel
  free to contact me off-list.

  Steve


  > From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...>
  > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
  > Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 17:49:32 +0100
  > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
  > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs
  >
  > I found a supplier of the Philips tubes in the UK, and will consider
  > replacing all the lights in my studio and office area.
  >
  > The www.thelightbulb.co.uk company say the Philips TL950 tubes are
available
  > in:
  >
  > 2ft 18w
  > 4ft 36w
  > 5ft 58w
  >
  > The Solux spots will light my gallery space in the studio, when the
people
  > get back to me.
  >
  > William
  >
  >




  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 Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines 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 OWNER AND
MODERATORS 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  OWNER AND
MODERATORS 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 DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




  SPONSORED LINKS Digital wedding photography  Learn digital photography
Digital photography college
        Digital photography  Digital photography web site  Digital
photography course


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    a..  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.

    b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Steve

Steve was that the prices for the Solux bulb?

I just received pricing from www.thelightbulb.co.uk for the Philips DL tubes
and an alternative tungsten lamp also colour balanced.

Philips TL950
4ft 36w @ £3.25 each
5ft 58w @ £3.45 each


The tubes have a Ra rating of 98%
The temperature is 5000 Kelvin.

BLV Whitestar lamps are priced between £3.45 - £4.25 dependant on the
quantities required. http://www.blv.co.uk/whitestar.htm

The person to talk to is Martin R Clements, Sales Manager Tel:01865 794500

Hope this helps, I may consider adding these to my website depending on the
discounts I can negotiate in the meantime just order from them.

William

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
Sent: 28 October 2005 17:46
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Solux Bulbs



  William

  I finally had a call back from these guys (and a long story about their
phone being
  switched away from BT without their knowledge and then cut off).  The guy
I spoke to
  (unfortunately I missed his name) seemed like a nice guy.  Buy 10 and you
get 50p off
  immediately.  Tell him that if you like them you are in for more and you
may get more off.
  I told him I may want another 20 and he knocked the price to £7 a bulb.
(Still a long way
  off US prices, even if you pay sales tax there.)

  Cheers

  Steve


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]