QTR-Quadtone RIP

Roy,

I have brought this up before: the one thing that is annoying me on 
QTR is that I can't print directly from an application (such as 
Lightroom or InDesign). I'm on Windows. Lately I have worked hard to 
streamline my workflow and this is the key issue remaining.

The most logical way would be to use QTR as print driver, but from 
your earlier comments I understand that this is too complicated to 
implement. 

"print to file" is not an option. InDesign only supports jpeg files, 
Lightroom 1 has not "print to file" option whatsoever. Lightroom 2 
beta has it, but again jpeg only.
  
As a workaround you suggested earlier to print to pdf, convert to 
tif, convert to Lab gray (via acrobat and Photoshop) and use the qtr 
file file monitor feature. Indeed this works, but it is a very 
incovenient workflow.

So I was thinking: would it a compromise be not to support Lab gray 
tif files only, but as well 1) jpeg, 2) RGB files (containing 
grayscale images only and 3) other profiles. It would mean that QTR 
has to do some format and profile conversion. I would expect this 
would not be very complicated (but I may be mistaken). Apart for use 
as print feature, this would greatly increase the flexibility of QTR 
in general as well?

Does this question make sense to you?

Kind regards,

Joost

Hi Joost,

Tiff files can be grayscale or RGB already.
Supporting jpeg may be a possibility but the driver seems a
bit more effort than I have time for.

Thanks,
Roy

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Joost Horsten <j.h.j.h@...> wrote:
> Roy,
>
>  I have brought this up before: the one thing that is annoying me on
>  QTR is that I can't print directly from an application (such as
>  Lightroom or InDesign). I'm on Windows. Lately I have worked hard to
>  streamline my workflow and this is the key issue remaining.
>
>  The most logical way would be to use QTR as print driver, but from
>  your earlier comments I understand that this is too complicated to
>  implement.
>
>  "print to file" is not an option. InDesign only supports jpeg files,
>  Lightroom 1 has not "print to file" option whatsoever. Lightroom 2
>  beta has it, but again jpeg only.
>
>  As a workaround you suggested earlier to print to pdf, convert to
>  tif, convert to Lab gray (via acrobat and Photoshop) and use the qtr
>  file file monitor feature. Indeed this works, but it is a very
>  incovenient workflow.
>
>  So I was thinking: would it a compromise be not to support Lab gray
>  tif files only, but as well 1) jpeg, 2) RGB files (containing
>  grayscale images only and 3) other profiles. It would mean that QTR
>  has to do some format and profile conversion. I would expect this
>  would not be very complicated (but I may be mistaken). Apart for use
>  as print feature, this would greatly increase the flexibility of QTR
>  in general as well?
>
>  Does this question make sense to you?
>
>  Kind regards,
>
>  Joost
>
>

Roy,

Thanks for your reply.

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" <roy@...> wrote:
 
> Tiff files can be grayscale or RGB already.

I assume I have to convert to the LAB RGB profile prior to printing, 
right? 

As not all applications support this, would it be possible to let QTR 
take any tiff with a color profile attached and convert it itself to 
LAB? (If I understand correctly, QTR just assumes LAB and does not 
actually use the profile attached)

> Supporting jpeg may be a possibility but the driver seems a
> bit more effort than I have time for.

That's a pity, since as indicated two of my main applications only 
support jpeg.


Thanks,

Joost

On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 12:20 AM, Joost Horsten <j.h.j.h@...> wrote:
> Roy,
>
>  Thanks for your reply.
>
>
>  --- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" <roy@...> wrote:
>
>  > Tiff files can be grayscale or RGB already.
>
>  I assume I have to convert to the LAB RGB profile prior to printing,
>  right?
>
>  As not all applications support this, would it be possible to let QTR
>  take any tiff with a color profile attached and convert it itself to
>  LAB? (If I understand correctly, QTR just assumes LAB and does not
>  actually use the profile attached)

I just want to clarify -- QTR takes RGB or grayscale format (i.e. 1 or
3 channels)
and ignores embedded profiles.
The "QTR LAB" profiles are still RGB or gray but use the L luminosity curve.

>
>
>  > Supporting jpeg may be a possibility but the driver seems a
>  > bit more effort than I have time for.
>
>  That's a pity, since as indicated two of my main applications only
>  support jpeg.

Well if I can find a usable jpeg library that may be all that is needed.

Roy

>
>
>  Thanks,
>
>
>
>  Joost
>
>

Joost,

I have the same "wish" as you (printing from Lightroom on Windows 
Vista) and wonder if using a RGB profile made by QTR wouldn't be the 
easiest solution.
I haven't done it yet because I am currently using Paul Roarks's 
profiles that are grey scale and therefore not usable with Lightroom.
But that's a pity because printing from Lightroom instead of 
Photoshop would be so much easier. 

Before I spend to much time and money to make/get RGB profiles for my 
papers (R220, MIS UTR2, EEM and HPR), I would be very interested to 
know if there are major drawbacks or problems to print that way from 
LR.

Marc

So let me understand this.... Lightroom is ProPhoto and has a gamma of
2.2 not 1.8 that QTR needs to "see" to print correctly.  MadManChan
has posted a 2.2 to 1.8 correction profile on the Lightroom forum
(load into print profile in print dialog) that will convert to 1.8
before it sends to QTR.  I tried this driver and the prints were
exactly identical so I guess I am working in sRBG or aRBG and did not
know it. Other Lightroom users lurking, can you share your workflow? I
am on a Mac with version 1.4.1 LR. 

Thank you,
George
george-at-videonow-dot-info

I think these should be reversed--- ProPhoto is 1.8 NOT 2.2. No wonder
it is so easy to slam your fingers in the color management "door"!

I found a thread on the LR forum and received a reply from Carl
Schofield that outlined these steps.  I tried this and produced better
results-- opened up the grays (but nothing like display) The profile
this generates goes in the LR printer profile drop down then print
through the QTR print menu as usual. 

The basic steps for making a Create-icc profile are as follows
(assuming you are using an i1 Spectrophotometer).  I haven't used the
i1 for QTR profiling for some time so the details are a bit fuzzy to
me right now.  I'm currently using and x-rite ColorMunki
spectrophotometer and the targets and scanning process are different.

1. In CS3 open one of the target gray files with no color management
applied.  You could use either the 21x4 step random gray tif or even
just the 21 step random tif, but the former would be better.
2. Print this file with no color management using your linearized QTR
profile.
3. Scan the printed gray wedge using the i1 and Measure tool,
following Roy's instructions in the eye-one folder.  Save the scan as
a text file.
4. Drop the text file onto the QTR-Create-ICC-RGB-bpc script and you
should get an output text file and icc profile.  Put the icc profile
into your user>Library>Colorsync>Profiles folder.

The journey continues, but this did help a lot.

George

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "ggriswold1" <ggriswold1@...> wrote:

>
> So let me understand this.... Lightroom is ProPhoto and has a gamma of
> 2.2 not 1.8 that QTR needs to "see" to print correctly.  MadManChan
> has posted a 2.2 to 1.8 correction profile on the Lightroom forum
> (load into print profile in print dialog) that will convert to 1.8
> before it sends to QTR.  I tried this driver and the prints were
> exactly identical so I guess I am working in sRBG or aRBG and did not
> know it. Other Lightroom users lurking, can you share your workflow? I
> am on a Mac with version 1.4.1 LR. 
> 
> Thank you,
> George
> george-at-videonow-dot-info
>

Roy,

Coming back to this my old request: I just bought Lightroom 2.0. It 
has amny valuable enhancements, but still the only "print to file" 
format that is supported is JPEG.

You answered previously:

> >  > Supporting jpeg may be a possibility but the driver seems a
> >  > bit more effort than I have time for.
> >
> >  That's a pity, since as indicated two of my main applications 
only
> >  support jpeg.
> 
> Well if I can find a usable jpeg library that may be all that is 
needed.

I did some googling and found the following links (there are many 
more)

http://www4.informatik.uni-
erlangen.de/Services/Doc/graphics/doc/jpeg/libjpeg.html

http://www.ijg.org/

http://nixbit.com/cat/programming/libraries/libjpeg/

I'm not an expert, but it seem to suggest that this would be a free 
jpeg library. I find many references to it. Does this open an 
opportunity?

Joost

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" <roy@...> wrote:

> Well if I can find a usable jpeg library that may be all that is needed.
> 
> Roy

Hi Roy, 

I'm sorry to bring this topic yet another time. It's just that it would make using QTR in a daily routine so much easier....  
I've looked once again into jpeg libraries. I think I mentioned this one earlier:

http://www.ijg.org/

In addition, I found this one:

http://openil.sourceforge.net

Seesm to do what is needed. I checked the license terms (LGPL2) and I can imagine those could be acceptable to you.

Is there any hope you could implement the "jpeg-workaround"? As a stimulus: I would be happy to re-pay my license fee ;-)

Joost

Joost, 
you may also be able to do this yourself by means of using imagemagick. For info about this free, open source, widely supported package, start here:

http://www.imagemagick.org/script/index.php

the windows download is here:
http://www.imagemagick.org/script/binary-releases.php#windows

with an overview of use for windows off this:
http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/windows/

HtH
Richard...

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Joost Horsten" <j.h.j.h@...> wrote:
>
.........

> I'm sorry to bring this topic yet another time. It's just that it would make using QTR in a daily routine so much easier....  
> I've looked once again into jpeg libraries. ..........
> 
> Is there any hope you could implement the "jpeg-workaround"? As a stimulus: I would be happy to re-pay my license fee ;-)
> 
> Joost
>