Digital BW, The Print

Does anyone know how to use custom RGB or CMYK profiling targets and import them into Monaco Profiler to build color profiles?  (I know it is the B&W Print forum, but a lot of you probably do color work too).

I usually use Bill Atkinson's RGB targets and build profiles with ProfileMaker, but want to start using Monaco instead.  Monaco generates its own targets, but they are massive and use 3 to 4 times as much paper.  For example, I can print Bill Atkinson's 1728 patch RGB target on one 11x17 sheet of paper.  A 1728 patch target created from Monaco Profiler requires three 17x22 sheets of paper!  

I know it has been done before, but the targets have to be reformatted and I don't know how to do it.  I'm on a PC operating WinXP Pro.

Thanks in advance,

Lou

Louis Dina schreef:
> Does anyone know how to use custom RGB or CMYK profiling targets and import them into Monaco Profiler to build color profiles?  (I know it is the B&W Print forum, but a lot of you probably do color work too).
> 
> I usually use Bill Atkinson's RGB targets and build profiles with ProfileMaker, but want to start using Monaco instead.  Monaco generates its own targets, but they are massive and use 3 to 4 times as much paper.  For example, I can print Bill Atkinson's 1728 patch RGB target on one 11x17 sheet of paper.  A 1728 patch target created from Monaco Profiler requires three 17x22 sheets of paper!  
> 
> I know it has been done before, but the targets have to be reformatted and I don't know how to do it.  I'm on a PC operating WinXP Pro.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Lou
> 
> 

Nearest Neighbour is your friend in downsampling targets, if the 
contrasty lines for patch separations get too small for the spectrometer 
you can downsample in one direction only. For recreating target lay-outs 
there is if I recall it correctly ColorPort.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst


New: Dinkla Canvas Wrap Actions

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

Lou, from Bill's "changes Log.rtf-

"Added a new free Mac-only application, "Extract Monaco Lab",  that reads an RGB 729 or RGB 1728 
Lab measurement file and writes a text file of Lab values sorted into the sequence required by MonacoProfiler.
Use MeasureTool or ColorPort to read any of my RGB 729 or RGB 1728 targets.  
From MeasureTool choose "Export Lab", or from ColorPort save the measurement data in CGATS format.
Run "Extract Monaco Lab", then import the resulting text file of Lab values into MonacoProfiler.
I worry about the long term support liability of releasing an application, but right now this is the only way 
for most people to use MonacoProfiler with my targets or with the Eye-One iO.  Free but no support."

so, go to his site and download the utility, it works, but only for those two chart sizes.
If you are on a PC try Eric Chan's site, I might recall he has a pc version of a similar utility.
Custom CMYK charts are not possible with Monaco. Although, if you play around with the options, you can customize the patch size and the spacing for smaller physical layouts. A bit clunky though.
Tyler
http://www.custom-digital.com/


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lou@...> wrote:

>
> Does anyone know how to use custom RGB or CMYK profiling targets and import them into Monaco Profiler to build color profiles?  (I know it is the B&W Print forum, but a lot of you probably do color work too).
> 
> I usually use Bill Atkinson's RGB targets and build profiles with ProfileMaker, but want to start using Monaco instead.  Monaco generates its own targets, but they are massive and use 3 to 4 times as much paper.  For example, I can print Bill Atkinson's 1728 patch RGB target on one 11x17 sheet of paper.  A 1728 patch target created from Monaco Profiler requires three 17x22 sheets of paper!  
> 
> I know it has been done before, but the targets have to be reformatted and I don't know how to do it.  I'm on a PC operating WinXP Pro.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Lou
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> Lou, from Bill's "changes Log.rtf-
> 
> "Added a new free Mac-only application, "Extract Monaco Lab",  that reads an RGB 729 or RGB 1728 
> Lab measurement file and writes a text file of Lab values sorted into the sequence required by MonacoProfiler.
> Use MeasureTool or ColorPort to read any of my RGB 729 or RGB 1728 targets.  
> From MeasureTool choose "Export Lab", or from ColorPort save the measurement data in CGATS format.
> Run "Extract Monaco Lab", then import the resulting text file of Lab values into MonacoProfiler.
> I worry about the long term support liability of releasing an application, but right now this is the only way 
> for most people to use MonacoProfiler with my targets or with the Eye-One iO.  Free but no support."
> 
> so, go to his site and download the utility, it works, but only for those two chart sizes.
> If you are on a PC try Eric Chan's site, I might recall he has a pc version of a similar utility.
> Custom CMYK charts are not possible with Monaco. Although, if you play around with the options, you can customize the patch size and the spacing for smaller physical layouts. A bit clunky though.
> Tyler

Thanks Tyler.

I'm on a PC so Bill's Apple Script won't work for me.  I have Eric Chan's utility, but it only supports the 1728 patch chart.  I am trying to find a way to utilize Bill's 918 patch and other charts.  

I have ColorPort, but I find that a bit clunky too, but at least more flexible than Profiler.  I did manage to adjust patch sizes and spacing, so the 1728 patch chart fits onto two 17x22 sheets, then I cut and pasted them onto a single sheet for printing from Photoshop.  ColorPort or Profiler won't know I have them on the same sheet of paper.  I haven't tried it yet, and hope my separators are okay for my Eye One Pro.  If that doesn't work, I will scramble the patches and try again.  

The only other RGB targets that work with Profiler have 343 or 729 patches.  Forget 343 patches, and the 729 patch target doesn't have enough shades of gray to suit me (which Bill's 918 patch target improves upon).  

I'll keep tinkering, and if I figure it out, I will share what I have.  

Regards,

Lou

Lou,

It looks like there are some options missing in the latest version of Colorport. It no longer allows you to reduce both X and Y sizes of the i1 patches. The older version allowed you to go to an 8mmx8mm patch. The problem with this is the speed that you need to move the i1, slow is definitely the word with patch sizes that small and I don't really recommend anything smaller than 8.5mm and a separator of .5mm for the i1 unless you have the newer faster version (mine is the second generation and slightly slower than the latest).

If you edit the XML file for the i1 you can probably drop the 10mm minimum down to something else, I did that with my Pulse to get smaller charts. There may be some other hacking you can do in the XML descriptor files that may allow a few other ways to optimize your charts. You can also set the default patch sizes so that you don't always have to mess with the settings.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <dfaprinting@...> wrote:
>
> Lou,
> 
> It looks like there are some options missing in the latest version of Colorport. It no longer allows you to reduce both X and Y sizes of the i1 patches. The older version allowed you to go to an 8mmx8mm patch. The problem with this is the speed that you need to move the i1, slow is definitely the word with patch sizes that small and I don't really recommend anything smaller than 8.5mm and a separator of .5mm for the i1 unless you have the newer faster version (mine is the second generation and slightly slower than the latest).
> 
> If you edit the XML file for the i1 you can probably drop the 10mm minimum down to something else, I did that with my Pulse to get smaller charts. There may be some other hacking you can do in the XML descriptor files that may allow a few other ways to optimize your charts. You can also set the default patch sizes so that you don't always have to mess with the settings.
>
Greg,

Excellent suggestion.  I found the Eye One Patch layout XML file in the colorport folder and edited it to allow me to make smaller patches and cram more of them onto a sheet.  I will pay attention to minimum patch sizes, especially if I get read errors.  Some of Bill Atkinson's Eye One charts are so small, (6 mm), that I do get many read errors, so your point is valid in my experience.  

I kept a copy of the original XML file as a backup, just in case.  

Thanks, that was a great suggestions and a big help.  

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lou@...> wrote:
> 
> Excellent suggestion.  I found the Eye One Patch layout XML file in the colorport folder and edited it to allow me to make smaller patches and cram more of them onto a sheet.  I will pay attention to minimum patch sizes, especially if I get read errors.  Some of Bill Atkinson's Eye One charts are so small, (6 mm), that I do get many read errors, so your point is valid in my experience.  
> 
> I kept a copy of the original XML file as a backup, just in case.  
> 
> Thanks, that was a great suggestions and a big help.  
> 
> Lou
>


You may try the random option too, but it never really helped me much. Pretty sure that 8mm is the minimum size for the i1 to read and at that size it will be slow going. I found that the little bit of savings in paper made a huge impact in my measuring time, so I tried to opt for larger patches to speed things up. There is a huge amount that can be saved if you were using a Pulse, from 12mm long down to about 8mm long, any smaller and it gets too time consuming to position the guide quickly for the scan. I think I wen with 5mm once and like 1mm spacing between rows which still cut it in half.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <dfaprinting@...> wrote:
>
 
> You may try the random option too, but it never really helped me much. Pretty sure that 8mm is the minimum size for the i1 to read and at that size it will be slow going. I found that the little bit of savings in paper made a huge impact in my measuring time, so I tried to opt for larger patches to speed things up. There is a huge amount that can be saved if you were using a Pulse, from 12mm long down to about 8mm long, any smaller and it gets too time consuming to position the guide quickly for the scan. I think I wen with 5mm once and like 1mm spacing between rows which still cut it in half.
>

Greg,

At least with the i1 in strip mode, the random option bombed.  XRite targets always have a solid black patch as an initial reference, and sometimes the next patch is black or near black.  Since there are no gaps, there can be insufficient contrast, which results in a read error.  With the edited XML file, I am now producing unscrambled 8.5 x 8.5 mm patches, using 0.50mm gaps.  They are reasonably compact and seem to read fine.  I'm pretty happy with that.

Regards,

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lou@...> wrote:
>

> Greg,
> 
> At least with the i1 in strip mode, the random option bombed.  XRite targets always have a solid black patch as an initial reference, and sometimes the next patch is black or near black.  Since there are no gaps, there can be insufficient contrast, which results in a read error.  With the edited XML file, I am now producing unscrambled 8.5 x 8.5 mm patches, using 0.50mm gaps.  They are reasonably compact and seem to read fine.  I'm pretty happy with that.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Lou
>

I prefer the unscrambled patches whenever possible because it give you an idea of what is possible to hit and where there might be problems. That said there are reasons to use the scrambled patches... Once upon a time it was said that the printers could have issues printing the same series of colors (probably do to ink flow issues) so that the profile would not be as good if the patches were all in sequence. Not sure this applies with the more modern printers.

For what it's worth, Bill Atkinson told us tests by him concluded that devices reported back more accurate measurements from unscrambled charts, I don't recall how significant the difference was, but it was constistant behavior.
Just more fodder...
Tyler
http://www.custom-digital.com/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <dfaprinting@...> wrote:

>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lou@> wrote:
> >
> 
> > Greg,
> > 
> > At least with the i1 in strip mode, the random option bombed.  XRite targets always have a solid black patch as an initial reference, and sometimes the next patch is black or near black.  Since there are no gaps, there can be insufficient contrast, which results in a read error.  With the edited XML file, I am now producing unscrambled 8.5 x 8.5 mm patches, using 0.50mm gaps.  They are reasonably compact and seem to read fine.  I'm pretty happy with that.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Lou
> >
> 
> I prefer the unscrambled patches whenever possible because it give you an idea of what is possible to hit and where there might be problems. That said there are reasons to use the scrambled patches... Once upon a time it was said that the printers could have issues printing the same series of colors (probably do to ink flow issues) so that the profile would not be as good if the patches were all in sequence. Not sure this applies with the more modern printers.
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, Bill Atkinson told us tests by him concluded that devices reported back more accurate measurements from unscrambled charts, I don't recall how significant the difference was, but it was constistant behavior.
> Just more fodder...

> > I prefer the unscrambled patches whenever possible because it give you an idea of what is possible to hit and where there might be problems. That said there are reasons to use the scrambled patches... Once upon a time it was said that the printers could have issues printing the same series of colors (probably do to ink flow issues) so that the profile would not be as good if the patches were all in sequence. Not sure this applies with the more modern printers.
> >
>
Thanks for the feedback.  Tyler, I remember Bill saying the same thing about better accuracy with unscrambled charts.  Apparently, the i1 in strip does better that way.  So, I am using unscrambled charts for my inkjet.  

Greg, valid point about presses.  For press, I will either profile scrambled charts, or multiple unscrambled charts printed in different orientations and averaged readings.  

I didn't notice earlier that ColorPort allows me to create gaps in scrambled charts too, so the read errors with the i1 in strip mode become a moot point.  

Lou

hi,

I have question that's not directly related to that subject, but the title fits, so what the hell, maybe somebody will be able to help me out.
I have an issue with Monaco and B&W prints. I can manage a pretty decent B&W on matte papers (I used to think it's great, but then I saw K7 inkset can do and things changed a bit ;). anyway, when I try to do B&W on glossy papers, it always comes out a little greenish for my taste. I usually print patches from colorport (2989) and I noticed that there aren't that many neutral greys in the layout. that is when I got the idea to maybe make custom patches, designed specifically to profile for B&W. only thing stopping me is the fact that I haven't got a clue how to go about this. anyone can point me in the right direction?

thanks,
m.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "meeshieck" <michal@...> wrote:
>
> hi,
> 
> I have question that's not directly related to that subject, but the title fits, so what the hell, maybe somebody will be able to help me out.
> I have an issue with Monaco and B&W prints. I can manage a pretty decent B&W on matte papers (I used to think it's great, but then I saw K7 inkset can do and things changed a bit ;). anyway, when I try to do B&W on glossy papers, it always comes out a little greenish for my taste. I usually print patches from colorport (2989) and I noticed that there aren't that many neutral greys in the layout. that is when I got the idea to maybe make custom patches, designed specifically to profile for B&W. only thing stopping me is the fact that I haven't got a clue how to go about this. anyone can point me in the right direction?
> 
> thanks,
> m.
>

Are you talking about Monaco Profiler specifically?  I am assuming a standard color inkset?  RGB profiles with a driver, or CMYK profiles through a a RIP? 

First, Monaco Profiler is only compatible with certain targets, at least to the best of my knowledge.  It seems to choke on non-standard profiling targets.  Generally, most RGB profiles using the driver leave something to be desired for B&W work (though I can get surprisingly good B&W on matte and glossy papers with my Canon iPF6100 and custom RGB profiles).  A good CMYK RIP, such as StudioPrint, will do fine if properly set up.  The above assumes a color inkset.  

Dedicated B&W inksets require a RIP (QTR, StudioPrint, etc) or something like Paul Roark's approach using the driver, curves, etc.  

ColorPort will allow you to build custom targets, but they say you have to use one of the "X-Rite" compatible charts as a starting point.  Not sure if you can modify them or not and still use Profiler.  

You can download Bill Atkinson's 1728 patch RGB profiling target which has quite a few neutral and near-neutral patches.  It can be made to work with Monaco Profiler if you use a little conversion script written by Eric Chan.  It reformats the data and feeds it to Profiler in a format it expects.  Works great.  I don't think Eric wrote a script for any other targets.  Here's the link.  

http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/i1ConvertToMonacoLAB/index.html

I've been doing a lot of work and experimenting with Profiler lately.  Send me an email offline if I can be of any help.  
(Lou at LouDina dot com)

Lou

I'm sorry, I should have given more details in that post. I use a RIP and printing CMYK patches, usually generated in colorport. and of course Monaco for profile generation.
B&W inksets are not a problem. the issue is that every now and again I do B&W from CMYK and the outcome leaves a bit to be desired.

by the way, I believe you can open any patches measured in colorport in monaco.

thanks,
m.

Michal, as much as I like Monaco, I don't think the neutral axis build is it's strong suit. Do I recall that you also have GPS? It's neutral build is far superior, though for color images, perceptual conversions, Monaco is really great particularly for matte papers.
I assume you are using as much GCR as possible? I was disappointed in the black curve options in Profiler Gold and did the best I could to make a custom curve straight line, though it won't take K all the way up the scale. I hear Platinum might have more K curve control.
I don't know if more patches is going to help, it just uses a lot of color ink in the neutral axis which is going to be hard to make perfect B&W from, but that's also how it makes great full saturation dark color transitions.
Have you tried the tuning functions? I believe Walker told me he tunes all his Monaco profiles...
Tyler
http://www.custom-digital.com/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "meeshieck" <michal@...> wrote:

>
> I'm sorry, I should have given more details in that post. I use a RIP and printing CMYK patches, usually generated in colorport. and of course Monaco for profile generation.
> B&W inksets are not a problem. the issue is that every now and again I do B&W from CMYK and the outcome leaves a bit to be desired.
> 
> by the way, I believe you can open any patches measured in colorport in monaco.
> 
> thanks,
> m.
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> Michal, as much as I like Monaco, I don't think the neutral axis build is it's strong suit. Do I recall that you also have GPS? It's neutral build is far superior, though for color images, perceptual conversions, Monaco is really great particularly for matte papers.
> I assume you are using as much GCR as possible? I was disappointed in the black curve options in Profiler Gold and did the best I could to make a custom curve straight line, though it won't take K all the way up the scale. I hear Platinum might have more K curve control.
> I don't know if more patches is going to help, it just uses a lot of color ink in the neutral axis which is going to be hard to make perfect B&W from, but that's also how it makes great full saturation dark color transitions.
> Have you tried the tuning functions? I believe Walker told me he tunes all his Monaco profiles...
> Tyler
> http://www.custom-digital.com/


I can only speak of the Platinum level of Profiler... Never had any problems with neutrality as long as the RIP was properly set up and as long as I used a custom GCR. I was certainly able to make the GCR a straight line from white to black if that was what I wanted.

And no Profiler will not take custom targets. As far as I know the scripts do a little calculation to put things where Profiler expects them to be. I'm going to try and push them sometime this week to either put custom targets into Profiler as well as a few other features, or give a really good discount on a cross grade to the top level Gretag software.

If you want additional blacks, try the ECI2002 or the IT8.7 4 targets, those both have a lot of good black patches. I used to use the ECI2002 a lot with Printopen but when I went to Profiler for most things I started to use the standard Profiler 1379 or 2989 cmyk targets. The IT8.7 3 extended might work too since it has a decent number of blacks and a ramp. (look at the Spectroscan charts in "standard layout" to get a feel for what they offer)

If you are going to use the ECI2002 or IT8.7 4 targets, make sure you have the latest Colorport (1.5.4) and the latest Profiler (4.8.3) because there were some patches out of order with previous versions.

If need be you can save (and zip) a Profiler session and I can run it through for you so you can see if the difference between gold and platinum makes a difference. If you really want I can send you a Colorport pattern that you can configure and measure and I'll run it through Printopen for you. I'll have to generate the XML file because Printopen doesn't measure in the same order as the other devices on the ECI2002 target. Heidelberg really did a good job of explaining why the target was laid out the way it is, and after you measure enough of them with something like a dtp22 you start to learn what is going on. Thank the printing gods for scanning spectros!

Tyler,
I used to have ColorGPS, but I was running different trial versions of it. back then it was all about the color and matte papers, so I didn't really test it that much for B&W. and for color, monaco won by a landslide. now I do have the platinum version of monaco, so the control of K is well taken care of. it's just that those damn inks come out a bit greenish on glossy papers (especially the lights) and I can't quite figure out a way to compensate for that...
I haven't got into tuning profiles just yet, I've left it for dessert. I want to squeeze from patches as much as possible, so the tuning can be a finishing touch, rather than building the workflow on it.

thanks,
m.

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

>
> Michal, as much as I like Monaco, I don't think the neutral axis build is it's strong suit. Do I recall that you also have GPS? It's neutral build is far superior, though for color images, perceptual conversions, Monaco is really great particularly for matte papers.
> I assume you are using as much GCR as possible? I was disappointed in the black curve options in Profiler Gold and did the best I could to make a custom curve straight line, though it won't take K all the way up the scale. I hear Platinum might have more K curve control.
> I don't know if more patches is going to help, it just uses a lot of color ink in the neutral axis which is going to be hard to make perfect B&W from, but that's also how it makes great full saturation dark color transitions.
> Have you tried the tuning functions? I believe Walker told me he tunes all his Monaco profiles...
> Tyler
> http://www.custom-digital.com/
>

Greg,

I'll give the It8 targets a go and see if that helps anything. I also run Platinum so that's alright. However I would gladly take you up on that offer of Colorport pattern that you would run through Printopen. I would really like to see what comes out of that. Please contact me off list when you will a have a moment to do that.

thanks,
m.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <dfaprinting@...> wrote:

>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@> wrote:
> >
> > Michal, as much as I like Monaco, I don't think the neutral axis build is it's strong suit. Do I recall that you also have GPS? It's neutral build is far superior, though for color images, perceptual conversions, Monaco is really great particularly for matte papers.
> > I assume you are using as much GCR as possible? I was disappointed in the black curve options in Profiler Gold and did the best I could to make a custom curve straight line, though it won't take K all the way up the scale. I hear Platinum might have more K curve control.
> > I don't know if more patches is going to help, it just uses a lot of color ink in the neutral axis which is going to be hard to make perfect B&W from, but that's also how it makes great full saturation dark color transitions.
> > Have you tried the tuning functions? I believe Walker told me he tunes all his Monaco profiles...
> > Tyler
> > http://www.custom-digital.com/
> 
> 
> I can only speak of the Platinum level of Profiler... Never had any problems with neutrality as long as the RIP was properly set up and as long as I used a custom GCR. I was certainly able to make the GCR a straight line from white to black if that was what I wanted.
> 
> And no Profiler will not take custom targets. As far as I know the scripts do a little calculation to put things where Profiler expects them to be. I'm going to try and push them sometime this week to either put custom targets into Profiler as well as a few other features, or give a really good discount on a cross grade to the top level Gretag software.
> 
> If you want additional blacks, try the ECI2002 or the IT8.7 4 targets, those both have a lot of good black patches. I used to use the ECI2002 a lot with Printopen but when I went to Profiler for most things I started to use the standard Profiler 1379 or 2989 cmyk targets. The IT8.7 3 extended might work too since it has a decent number of blacks and a ramp. (look at the Spectroscan charts in "standard layout" to get a feel for what they offer)
> 
> If you are going to use the ECI2002 or IT8.7 4 targets, make sure you have the latest Colorport (1.5.4) and the latest Profiler (4.8.3) because there were some patches out of order with previous versions.
> 
> If need be you can save (and zip) a Profiler session and I can run it through for you so you can see if the difference between gold and platinum makes a difference. If you really want I can send you a Colorport pattern that you can configure and measure and I'll run it through Printopen for you. I'll have to generate the XML file because Printopen doesn't measure in the same order as the other devices on the ECI2002 target. Heidelberg really did a good job of explaining why the target was laid out the way it is, and after you measure enough of them with something like a dtp22 you start to learn what is going on. Thank the printing gods for scanning spectros!
>

well you might try it over an HTM environment then, at least that won't allow so much color ink down the neutral axis.
At this point I have different environments/profiles made different ways and from different software, even just for one paper, because nothing does it all...
I blew a good month and too much paper on every conceivable way of tweaking Monaco, and the nature of the ink setups sent to it. I found ways to mess it up, but nothing suddenly made it jump out of it's skin into abnormally magical performance. It does what it does very well, visually stunning perceptual color rendering, particularly on matte.
Nothing that I've seen touches GPS for the neutrals, and as you note perceptual matte paper renderings are it's weakness.
There's just no end to throwing money at this stuff...
Tyler


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "meeshieck" <michal@...> wrote:

>
> Tyler,
> I used to have ColorGPS, but I was running different trial versions of it. back then it was all about the color and matte papers, so I didn't really test it that much for B&W. and for color, monaco won by a landslide. now I do have the platinum version of monaco, so the control of K is well taken care of. it's just that those damn inks come out a bit greenish on glossy papers (especially the lights) and I can't quite figure out a way to compensate for that...
> I haven't got into tuning profiles just yet, I've left it for dessert. I want to squeeze from patches as much as possible, so the tuning can be a finishing touch, rather than building the workflow on it.
> 
> thanks,
> m.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@> wrote:
> >
> > Michal, as much as I like Monaco, I don't think the neutral axis build is it's strong suit. Do I recall that you also have GPS? It's neutral build is far superior, though for color images, perceptual conversions, Monaco is really great particularly for matte papers.
> > I assume you are using as much GCR as possible? I was disappointed in the black curve options in Profiler Gold and did the best I could to make a custom curve straight line, though it won't take K all the way up the scale. I hear Platinum might have more K curve control.
> > I don't know if more patches is going to help, it just uses a lot of color ink in the neutral axis which is going to be hard to make perfect B&W from, but that's also how it makes great full saturation dark color transitions.
> > Have you tried the tuning functions? I believe Walker told me he tunes all his Monaco profiles...
> > Tyler
> > http://www.custom-digital.com/
> >
>

well Tyler, you got that right. those toys drain unbelievable amounts of money...

btw what is HTM?

m.

sorry, I assumed from you'd have seen the occassional mention of it on the StudioPrint forum, or from Ergosoft.
It's an option when you start a new environment, you'll see it. Or, you may have to download it from the site. It uses Epson's screening, but let's you linearize and CMYK profile over it. So no light ink control, dot size, total ink, or black channel build control. But better than the RGB driver. So if you need access to that behavior you can still optimize it and print from the RIP as usual, instead of out of applications.
It helps for papers that ripple under hi ink loads, etc..
Specific setup instructions, contact ErgoSoft if you want to try it...
You sure won't have all that CMY in your neutral axis shadows with it, but you will in the highlights. Could help.
Tyler

  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "meeshieck" <michal@...> wrote:

>
> well Tyler, you got that right. those toys drain unbelievable amounts of money...
> 
> btw what is HTM?
> 
> m.
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "meeshieck" <michal@...> wrote:
>
> Greg,
> 
> I'll give the It8 targets a go and see if that helps anything. I also run Platinum so that's alright. However I would gladly take you up on that offer of Colorport pattern that you would run through Printopen. I would really like to see what comes out of that. Please contact me off list when you will a have a moment to do that.
> 
> thanks,
> m.

Michal,

I viewed Monaco and ProfileMaker profiles for a luster paper in ColorThink (built from the exact same measurement file).  Paper white measures a little cool (-0.3a, -0.6b).  The raw measurement data for the lighter gray patches generally measures a little cooler than paper white (in the -1.0a, -2.5b range, plus or minus).  profiling Target - RGB data printed from PS with all color management off in PS and driver.  

Like you, I found that in the 1/4 tones, BOTH Monaco and ProfileMaker overshot the mark a little on the blue/yellow axis, pushing it from a negative b* reading to a positive b*.  I printed a grayscale with both profiles, using perceptual, and measurements are slightly yellow-green, as you reported.  The greenishness of the paper showed through, but the blue went to yellow (in the range of -0.5a, +1.2b).  I was able to correct the gray axis with Profile Editor.  

Maybe CMYK profiles on a linear device will be better than RGB profiles, but I suspect Tyler is right on the mark.....a perfect gray axis is not the strong suit of either package.  I would think that a heavy GCR would definitely help gray balance.  

I haven't done any checking on matte papers.  Just thought I'd pass this along.  

Lou

thanks for all the advice guys. I am doing some testing now and will get back to you with reports once I have some results.

m.