Datacolor User to User Support Group.

Thanks Tom,  I did a little research this morning and read that coated 
art paper settings have smaller gamut's than the photo papers 
(luster,glossy),  there for are easier to profile.  Maybe that is why 
the test targets I printed on epson luster look better with the art 
paper settings.  Duno.

So when I start to build a profile, I have to print a chart of every 
paper setting every time?  it would be nice for us 24"roll paper  users 
to be able to print the tests in a strait line instead of 4 corners.  
Canvas will be a real pain to test. Maybe I will use qimage or 
photoshop.  In fact I just remembered that qimage will remember all the 
printer settings and keep them in memory . So once I input them once,  
it will only take one click to recall each media setting.  I might be on 
to something here.

I am still struggling to see the overall (the BIG picture) relationships 
between the monitor Black/white/gamma points, the profile black/white 
points, the soft proof black/white points, the printer black/white 
points The rendering intent black/white points not to mention black 
point compensation.  I wish there was a visual road map I could look at 
to (visually) see the relationships all on one big chart. Being a 
totally visual learner (I have to be able to imagine a visual image of 
something in my brain in order to understand it, this can be tough with 
computer concepts) incremental learning doesn't work so well with me. 
Unfortunately incremental learning is the way most of the world is set 
up.  I am sure glad C.D. puts pictures in the help files.

Yes, it is better than atkinsons. And a shmo like me made it the same 
day I got the stuff. I would sure hate to be the other profiling system 
makers right now.  I bet they are not sleeping so well lately.

Randy

Tom wrote:

>--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, randy <rlphoto@...> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Now, all the screwing around with these media settings, could this be 
>>eliminated with a RIP? 
>>    
>>
>
>Don't you just end up with different media setting to mess around
>with?  You may actually end up with MORE settings to mess around with
>depending on the RIP.
>
>  
>
>>Is there a way to force the printer to just print the test right?
>>    
>>
>
>Thats kind of the problem isn't it.  Somewhere in one of the threads a
>fellow member posted a quote from one of the professional profiling
>services who said "for some combinations of paper and ink just will
>not profile well".  It really won't matter who's equipment is used to
>make a profile.
>
>The generic test images are good but it seems there may be utility in
>having other test images which exercise a specific area of the gamut
>for problem resolutions.  The two areas I have heard of with issues
>are browns, as in your messages, and deep blues.  The R1800 has a red
>and a blue ink in addition to the CMYK inks for just that reason.
>
>Half of the magic is in finding just the right paper.  I'm certainly
>no color expert but as a fellow enthusiast am greatly interested in
>which combinations of paper and ink work the best.  I only have the
>one printer so can comment only on Epson UltraChrome high gloss inkset
>on the R1800 but would be most happy to share what works well for me.
>
>I've also found that having a good tool goes a very long way in
>helping me truely understand color management.  It was much easier to
>just think that my printer was uncalibrated and everything would be
>MUCH better with .. say ... a RIP or a more expensive printer.  It is
>a very good sign that your profile does a better job than the one
>produced by Bill Atkinson.  That means you're definately doing
>something right!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>