QTR-Quadtone RIP

I've just read of the new ColorMunki, and all who have used it seem to
think it does a very credible job. I'm wondering if any QTR'ers have
looked at it and does it have any place in this environment.

=Alan R.

> I've just read of the new ColorMunki, and all who have used it seem to
> think it does a very credible job. I'm wondering if any QTR'ers have
> looked at it and does it have any place in this environment.

Hi

I've been using the CM for testing for some time and at the moment know of no easy way 
to get its measurements into a form usable by QTR

The device and software is designed in a very closed manner, they do not intend it to be 
upgradeable or to be used with third party software. That's not to say someone won't 
come up with a hack to make use of the device, but don't expect any help (for the time 
being) from X-Rite.

This is a pity since it really is easy to use reading patches, and is a full UV cut 
spectrophotometer, similar to what is found in the -much- more expensive iSis

It's firmly aimed at the graphics design and wedding/social/'prosumer' photographer 
market.

I've got a review (from using pre-release software) available at 
<http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki.html>

I'm waiting for the proper release software before writing anything more detailed, since 
there are still some rough edges.

If you see anyone (myself included ;-) commenting on quality of profiles anywhere, then 
do take their opinions with a slight pinch of salt, since -no one- has final software at the 
moment :-)  Given the target market, expect to see a lot of 'reviews' rather low on 
information content and heavily reliant on supplied PR materials ;-)

I would say that it generated a reasonable CMYK profile for my networked HP K80 office 
printer, using hp-ijs/foomatic drivers on a Mac and plain paper. That's my standard 'quick 
test' printer. It caught me out in that it detected that it was a postscript driver and 
produced a CMYK profile (with no input from me). It also made a perfectly acceptable 
profile for my Epson 1160 using third party inks and canon photo paper.

One thing else to remember about the (large) ColorMunki target market is that if you 
appreciate why sometimes you might choose one rendering intent over another, then you 
are in the 'expert' category and not who they are aiming it at...  If you have an inkling 
about how to use a QTR profile to linearise B/W output, then you are in the ColorMunki 
'Rocket Scientist' league :-)

bye for now

Keith Cooper

Keith,

The colormunki spot palette on the xrite website can be exported as  
Lab data to a csv text file, which is all that is needed for QTR.

Carl

On Apr 12, 2008, at 7:41 AM, Keith Cooper wrote:

>> I've just read of the new ColorMunki, and all who have used it seem  
>> to
>> think it does a very credible job. I'm wondering if any QTR'ers have
>> looked at it and does it have any place in this environment.
>
> Hi
>
> I've been using the CM for testing for some time and at the moment  
> know of no easy way
> to get its measurements into a form usable by QTR
>
> The device and software is designed in a very closed manner, they do  
> not intend it to be
> upgradeable or to be used with third party software. That's not to  
> say someone won't
> come up with a hack to make use of the device, but don't expect any  
> help (for the time
> being) from X-Rite.
>
> This is a pity since it really is easy to use reading patches, and  
> is a full UV cut
> spectrophotometer, similar to what is found in the -much- more  
> expensive iSis
>
> It's firmly aimed at the graphics design and wedding/ 
> social/'prosumer' photographer
> market.
>
> I've got a review (from using pre-release software) available at
> <http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki.html>
>
> I'm waiting for the proper release software before writing anything  
> more detailed, since
> there are still some rough edges.
>
> If you see anyone (myself included ;-) commenting on quality of  
> profiles anywhere, then
> do take their opinions with a slight pinch of salt, since -no one-  
> has final software at the
> moment :-)  Given the target market, expect to see a lot of  
> 'reviews' rather low on
> information content and heavily reliant on supplied PR materials ;-)
>
> I would say that it generated a reasonable CMYK profile for my  
> networked HP K80 office
> printer, using hp-ijs/foomatic drivers on a Mac and plain paper.  
> That's my standard 'quick
> test' printer. It caught me out in that it detected that it was a  
> postscript driver and
> produced a CMYK profile (with no input from me). It also made a  
> perfectly acceptable
> profile for my Epson 1160 using third party inks and canon photo  
> paper.
>
> One thing else to remember about the (large) ColorMunki target  
> market is that if you
> appreciate why sometimes you might choose one rendering intent over  
> another, then you
> are in the 'expert' category and not who they are aiming it at...   
> If you have an inkling
> about how to use a QTR profile to linearise B/W output, then you are  
> in the ColorMunki
> 'Rocket Scientist' league :-)
>
> bye for now
>
> Keith Cooper

> The colormunki spot palette on the xrite website can be exported as  
> Lab data to a csv text file, which is all that is needed for QTR.

Doh! You're quite right there, I was thinking of using it to measure strips in the main 
ColorMunki Photo Application and getting the info.

I keep forgetting about the ColorPicker application (I blame it on being traumatised
by trying to use the abysmal Eye One Share program :-)

It does indeed output CSV files which contain the following header info:

Name,L*,a*,b*,380 nm,390 nm,400 nm,410 nm,420 nm,430 nm,440 nm,450 nm
,460 nm,470 nm,480 nm,490 nm,500 nm,510 nm,520 nm,530 nm,540 nm,
550 nm,560 nm,570 nm,580 nm,590 nm,600 nm,610 nm,620 nm,630 nm,
640 nm,650 nm,660 nm,670 nm,680 nm,690 nm,700 nm,710 nm,720 nm,
730 nm

So the upshot is that yes, it is fine for using with QTR :-)  Which is nice. I'd been
so stuck on problems with the profiling side of things I'd not properly
looked elsewhere...

Keith

Hi

After realising I could actually do some other things with the CM...

I've been trying it out with some of the QTR Eye One targets and have a
few notes that might be of help for anyone looking to use the data from
the CM

1 If you use the standard targets, they are too small for easy use with the
CM. If you expand the 21x4 target so that it comfortably fits on a single
A4 sheet (with at least an inch before and after the patches start) then it
scans very easily in scanning mode in ColorPicker

2 The randomised set of targets often miss the first/last patch at 30%  I
swapped them with the 45% patches and readings were much more accurate.

3 You can sort a set of patches (say a single 21 patch set) into luminosity
order. However if you export the data set then the values in the file are still
in the original scanned order. If you take all your measured patches (sorted)
and place them in a new project, and export this (as CSV) then you get the
values in sorted order

4 If you do this sort then of course you lose any crossovers which the
profile generator would catch.

5 The CSV file contains 'names' for colours, so with my rather poor K80 on
plain paper, the full 21 patches were given the following names (randomised
order 30/45 swapped): 

Bluish Gray
Dark Purplish Gray
Bluish White
Light Bluish Gray
Dark Grayish Green
Light Bluish Gray
Grayish Purple
Dark Grayish Brown
Light Bluish Gray
Dark Gray
Purplish White
Purplish Gray
Dark Grayish Blue
Light Purplish Gray
Dark Purplish Gray
Bluish White
Pale Blue
Dark Gray
Purplish White
Purplish Gray
Dark Grayish Brown

If anyone wants a full CSV measurements file to play with (it does have
non-linearity in it) then drop me a mail directly

I suspect that a 'ColorMunki version' of the Eye-One folder should be
quite feasible...

bye for now

Keith Cooper

I wanted to let forum members know that we still have a few open spots in
this year's Golden Trout Photo Workshop.  Roy Harrington and I will be the
nominal leaders, but there are so many pro-level participants, that I think
I learn more from the participants than they learn from me.  There will also
be a naturalist there for spouses, etc. who are more interested in the
natural history aspect of the area than photography. 

The workshop runs from Sunday, June 29 through Saturday, July 5.  The total
cost, all food and "lodging" (tent cabins) included, is $395 -- a wild
bargain.

This (very) non-profit (IRC 501(c)(3)) workshop is in the Golden Trout
Wilderness (thus its name), which is in California's High Sierras.  It's
located at the southern border of the John Muir Wilderness, a few miles
south of Mount Whitney, and is one of the only facilities allowed to exist
in a wilderness area.  

It's not for everyone.  This is a wilderness camp.  It's at high elevation
and a 3 mile hike to get in.  On most days people will want to hike a few
more miles to get to the best shooting venues.  But, we do have a
solar-electric system for running printers, charging batteries, etc., and
we'll be spending as much time as participants want in demonstrating
printing-related topics.

In general, for those who are into this type of environment and want to
spend a week with like-minded photographers, it's a great bargain and a lot
of fun.  One participant who had never experienced the High Sierra
wilderness simply described his week at camp as "life changing" --
presumably for the better since he's coming back.

Our official web site is at http://www.goldentroutworkshops.org/   

There is a PDF version of our brochure and registration form at
http://www.goldentroutworkshops.org/GTC_BROCHURE08b.pdf  

I've posted some photos and additional information at
http://www.paulroark.com/GTthumbnails.html 

Contact me or Roy if you'd like further information.

I hope to meet a few more of you this summer at the historic Golden Trout
Camp.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Cooper" <yg_1@...> wrote:
>
> > The colormunki spot palette on the xrite website can be exported as  
> > Lab data to a csv text file, which is all that is needed for QTR.
> 
> Doh! You're quite right there, I was thinking of using it to measure
strips in the main 
> ColorMunki Photo Application and getting the info.
> 
> I keep forgetting about the ColorPicker application (I blame it on
being traumatised
> by trying to use the abysmal Eye One Share program :-)
> 
> It does indeed output CSV files which contain the following header info:
> 
> Name,L*,a*,b*,380 nm,390 nm,400 nm,410 nm,420 nm,430 nm,440 nm,450 nm
> ,460 nm,470 nm,480 nm,490 nm,500 nm,510 nm,520 nm,530 nm,540 nm,
> 550 nm,560 nm,570 nm,580 nm,590 nm,600 nm,610 nm,620 nm,630 nm,
> 640 nm,650 nm,660 nm,670 nm,680 nm,690 nm,700 nm,710 nm,720 nm,
> 730 nm
> 
> So the upshot is that yes, it is fine for using with QTR :-)  Which
is nice. I'd been
> so stuck on problems with the profiling side of things I'd not properly
> looked elsewhere...
> 
> Keith
>
Keith,

What are your feelings at this point concerning the ColorMunki and the 
the PrintFixPro suite. I noticed that you do not include the
ProntFixPro in your chart of Consumer vs fine Art devices.

John H

> What are your feelings at this point concerning the ColorMunki and the 
> the PrintFixPro suite. I noticed that you do not include the
> ProntFixPro in your chart of Consumer vs fine Art devices.

Hi

That chart is from X-rite so wouldn't have the PFP in it ;-)

I normally never do direct comparisons myself, since without knowing
someone's personal preferences/requirements I don't think they are
always terribly helpful.

Both can  produce good profiles, however the Datacolor solution allows
for a lot more 'tinkering' or adjustment of how you make your profiles.

In some ways they are aimed at different markets. The CM works well
with its supplied software (with a few minor issues ;-) but currently if
you want a more advanced solution from X-Rite then it's a rather more
expensive i1 solution you'll need.

The SpyderPrint software has been updated recently and supports the
original PFP hardware.

Making a choice depends on how much you want to spend and what
level of functionality you are looking for. I know that some find the need
to measure individual patches with the PFP a lot of hassle, whilst other
people find it no bother at all.

As someone who has been writing and doing talks about colour
management for a while I suspect that the arrival of the CM will benefit
both X-Rite and Datacolor and raise  general awareness of the topic
(and since it's a particular interest of mine, of B/W printing too ;-)

bye for now

Keith Cooper

Keith,

Have you (or other beta testers) evaluated the printer profile  
optimization that CM offers?  Seems to me that if the profile  
optimization works as advertised this would be a very powerful point  
in favor of the CM.  I would be particularly interested to see how the  
optimization does when you throw a neutral grayscale at it.

Carl

On Apr 13, 2008, at 3:38 PM, Keith Cooper wrote:

>> What are your feelings at this point concerning the ColorMunki and  
>> the
>> the PrintFixPro suite. I noticed that you do not include the
>> ProntFixPro in your chart of Consumer vs fine Art devices.
>
> Hi
>
> That chart is from X-rite so wouldn't have the PFP in it ;-)
>
> I normally never do direct comparisons myself, since without knowing
> someone's personal preferences/requirements I don't think they are
> always terribly helpful.
>
> Both can  produce good profiles, however the Datacolor solution allows
> for a lot more 'tinkering' or adjustment of how you make your  
> profiles.
>
> In some ways they are aimed at different markets. The CM works well
> with its supplied software (with a few minor issues ;-) but  
> currently if
> you want a more advanced solution from X-Rite then it's a rather more
> expensive i1 solution you'll need.
>
> The SpyderPrint software has been updated recently and supports the
> original PFP hardware.
>
> Making a choice depends on how much you want to spend and what
> level of functionality you are looking for. I know that some find  
> the need
> to measure individual patches with the PFP a lot of hassle, whilst  
> other
> people find it no bother at all.
>
> As someone who has been writing and doing talks about colour
> management for a while I suspect that the arrival of the CM will  
> benefit
> both X-Rite and Datacolor and raise  general awareness of the topic
> (and since it's a particular interest of mine, of B/W printing too ;-)
>
> bye for now
>
> Keith Cooper

> Have you (or other beta testers) evaluated the printer profile  
> optimization that CM offers?  Seems to me that if the profile  
> optimization works as advertised this would be a very powerful point  
> in favor of the CM.  I would be particularly interested to see how the  
> optimization does when you throw a neutral grayscale at it.

This is indeed something I'd like to look at in more detail too ;-)

As I've mentioned, I'm waiting for the next release of the s/w before I can
do some more detailed testing.

The PFP/SpyderPrint software has a grey balance chart addition that covers
a range of near greys and works quite well. I'll be interested to see what
additional test patches get generated by a greyscale 'optimisation' image
for the CM.

Keith