Printer Calabrations ?

ThrillaMozilla said:

Thanks for your knowledgeable reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. The i1Studio is a ColorMunki

Click to expand...

That's why I wrote Munki/i1Studio And I have one, including the software? But also i1Pro, MYIRO, DTP20 and access to literaly evry existing device still in production. So my answer was: NO, the software included can't handle different illuminants and iProfiler don't works neither with i1 Studio nor Spectrolino. iProfiler can handle the task, either by using the A illuminant or by measuring your particular light.
Spectrolino isn't a good idea as you may run into problems due to old software provided which may not run on newer systems. You better look out for a second hand i1Pro2. Don't buy a "basic" version as they don't have the licence for printer profiles. If you are printing RGB the "photographer" version will be perfect. Even a i1Pro RevD can do the job. Here in France you can find them for €150. If you want to create profiles for your special light, the included UV Filter won't be a problem, your light doesn't contain the UV wave lengths.
Argyll can handle it too and with Argyll you can use even the basic i1Pro in "full monty", the same with the i1Studio.


Edit:

Andreas S said:

The Munki/i1Studio has an allowance of deviance between 2 devices of Delta 2000 = 1,5 conform to the xrite data sheet. A barely skilled eye can see a difference from Delta 2000 = 0,5. If you take on account the fact that the deviance between 2 measurings of the same color with the same device can attempt sometimes Delta 2000 = 0,38/Delta 76 (the real deviance in accuracy) = 1,2 - make your own opinion about the quality of your profile.
You can see the difference with a naked eye. I guess, not everyone has free acces to different devices so it is difficult to judge. If you want I'll send a target to you, you print it out, send the print to me and I will send you the profile. Than compare the results.

Click to expand...

It happens I make a new profile for the same paper/ink with the Colormunki when I am not satisfied.
Sometimes the result is the same, sometimes I have the impression it is better (but maybe I did not respect the same paper dry times).

Anyway these differences are much smaller than between the "official" profiles published by the printer and paper manufacturers and the ones I make myself for the same combo.

Not to speak about people who use these profiles with 3th party ink.
And oh yes you can use your 3th party (red) cartridge for regular prints and change to OEM for more critical work.
Either your prints with 3th party will be too weak or the ones with OEM too strong, while with a custom profile the 3th party ink lesser gamut will be compensated for most of your photos since no color is at the limit of the ink (and you won't see any differences with OEM).

The better 3th party inks sold by providers well known here are now close enough to OEM to make good looking prints, but what should you do with no brand paper then ?
Since ink is only part of the cost, it doesn't make a lot of sense to print with 3th party ink and buy paper at the full price.
After a few boxes a second hand Colormunki is cheaper.

Although you can print on Aldi paper with a Canon Platinum or Glossy profile, and on most luster paper with an Ilford Smooth Pearl.

Andreas S said:

That's why I wrote Munki/i1Studio And I have one, including the software? But also i1Pro, MYIRO, DTP20 and access to literaly evry existing device still in production. So my answer was: NO, the software included can't handle different illuminants and iProfiler don't works neither with i1 Studio nor Spectrolino. iProfiler can handle the task, either by using the A illuminant or by measuring your particular light.
Spectrolino isn't a good idea as you may run into problems due to old software provided which may not run on newer systems. You better look out for a second hand i1Pro2. Don't buy a "basic" version as they don't have the licence for printer profiles. If you are printing RGB the "photographer" version will be perfect. Even a i1Pro RevD can do the job. Here in France you can find them for €150. If you want to create profiles for your special light, the included UV Filter won't be a problem, your light doesn't contain the UV wave lengths.
Argyll can handle it too and with Argyll you can use even the basic i1Pro in "full monty", the same with the i1Studio.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for the information. Thanks also to Ink stained Fingers.

Andreas, you actually mentioned the Munki/i1Studio plus third party software such as yours. Your software? Can you be more specific? I already know about ArgyllCMS, and should be able to handle it.

I have Windows XP computers (and older), so I should be able to run a Spectrolino. But it's so old, I don't know.

How would a Pro or Spectrolino be preferable to the Studio? I have no experience with any of these, so it's hard to tell.

palombian said:

Anyway these differences are much smaller than between the "official" profiles published by the printer and paper manufacturers and the ones I make myself for the same combo.

Click to expand...

No surprise, some paper manufacturers use spectrophotometers which only can handle UV-cut measuring. As no human has a built in UV-filter you will see the colours very different in this case. Some c'ant handle the ink limit for RGB too and just copy and paste the ink limites from the closest "official" paper + ink combo.
Reporting to the printers mentioned in your signature I suppose your profile are created on the basis of "original" profiles. By this you refine the "original" profile, that's why even a profile created with a Colormunki will give an advantage.

palombian said:

Since ink is only part of the cost, it doesn't make a lot of sense to print with 3th party ink and buy paper at the full price

Click to expand...

For general purpose, yes. It also becomes possible to use papers sold for offset printing. (I will create some profiles for Fedrigoni papers for a school of design in the next days)
When you need some certifications like Epson Digigraphie you are prisoner of official combos. Despite the fact that one can achieve at less the same quality with other papers. Standard Velin d'Arches or Canson Aquarell or other cotton papers works very well with inkjet…

ThrillaMozilla said:

I have Windows XP computers (and older), so I should be able to run a Spectrolino.

Click to expand...

If the software is provided yes. If I remember well the spectrolino was discontinued 2007.

ThrillaMozilla said:

How would a Pro or Spectrolino be preferable to the Studio?

Click to expand...

The Pro is used which iProfiler which allows the use of different illuminants and also uses much more patches. = Better accuracy. Just be aware do not buy a i1Pro basic as they are only licensed for monitor and beamer calibration.
The spectrolino, at his time, was at the higher end compared to the i1Pro. Better repeatability and so on. But the softare is outdated today.

If you use Argyll, you can do all you need with i1Studio, i1Pro or Spectrolino. juste give attention while setting the flags in the script. Light measuring with the i1Studio will be possible too but not with the Spectrolino.
Once you found the right settings save the scripts to avoid rewriting them every time.

I see, thank you. I really appreciate the advice. Also, the Pro instruments except for the Spectrolino have better spectral resolution. The Spectrolino also records only up to 650 nm, compared to 750 nm for the other instruments.

Andreas S said:

No surprise, some paper manufacturers use spectrophotometers which only can handle UV-cut measuring. As no human has a built in UV-filter you will see the colours very different in this case. Some c'ant handle the ink limit for RGB too and just copy and paste the ink limites from the closest "official" paper + ink combo.
..................

Click to expand...

Could you elaborate a bit ?

Isn’t UV light called ‘ultra’ because it’s beyond the reach of the human eye, which is sensitive only to the 400-700 mill micron range?. Therefore, the human eye has, in some way, UV and IR built-in cut filters.

So this is a complicated business, basically have i wasted my money on the iMac pro with the 5k screen, should i have purchased a stand alone Eizo ?? will the iMac 5k inbuilt screen not calibrate to a decent spec, if we refer back to the original post at the start of this thread on my requirements or the help i was looking for.

thanks for all the replies, its Facinating reading them all...Professors me thinks I'm dealing with here.

Andy

Wisey said:

have i wasted my money on the iMac pro with the 5k screen, should i have purchased a stand alone Eizo ??

Click to expand...

No, you haven't. The screen isn't bad after calibration. You always can find better on behalf of everything. Just do calibration and you will be happy.

Artur5 said:

Isn’t UV light called ‘ultra’ because it’s beyond the reach of the human eye, which is sensitive only to the 400-700 mill micron range?. Therefore, the human eye has, in some way, UV and IR built-in cut filters.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I better should say "As no human has a built in filter to exclude the UV effect". We cant see the waves in the light but the reaction of materia to these waves as the materia is sensitive. A paper full of OBA will become blueish under D65 illuminant. (D65 is the sun at noon. ) This will influence to our perception of colour, it's like changing the whitepoint. So, if one uses UV-cut to create a printer profile with any paper which isn't "natural white" he can't capture the percepted coulours but only the "pure colour". But as the inks are blocking UV at a different level (yellow is a f******g good UV absorber/blocker) you will get miscoloured prints. Generaly the prints will be yellowish from D50 on.
The use of UV-cut is very useful in some special. E.g. quality control of dyes or if you need to find the original composition of colours on a substrate full of OBA.

Andreas S said:

This will influence to our perception of colour, it's like changing the whitepoint.

Click to expand...

that's the dilemma - once you have printed your image you cannot change the whitepoint of the printout anymore so it will look somewhat different under different viewing conditions, and even worse - different under light containing UV light or not with an otherwise identical white point. The OBA's transform some of the UV - non visible - light into a blueish/violet light via the fluorescence effect . You effectively would need different color profiles for all these different conditions. But the eyes can make quite big compromises in this respect so as long as you are not in the commercial printing business you can run some tests for yourself when you create profiles on your own - like D50 or D65 as the typical settings and different measuring settings like M1 or M2 - with or w/o inclusion of the OBA effect.
Let me show you the differences, this is the spectrum of the white point of a typical glossy photo paper, with lots of OBA's


Look to the violet curve (M1) which shows the efffects of the OBA's, you even get a reflection factor of 1.1 - the paper is refecting more blue light than it gets from the ambient light, the otherwise typical reflection rate is in the range of 0.9 to 0.95, the invisible UV light is transformed into additional blue light raising the level significantly. The green curve excludes all OBA effects - the difference is significant (forget the M0 data in this case here) . The number tell you the same - the Lab value for blue - the b value of -9.48 is a clearly visible blueish tint of the paper.
And this is the spectrum of the white point of a photo paper with barely any OBA - a HP premium plus photo paper,

There is barely any difference between the M1 and M2 curve , the paper does not react to UV light since there are no/only very few OBA's in the paper in this case and the reflection rate always stays below 1.
And to make things worse - the effect of OBA's fade like poor dye inks do - the effect can be gone after a while under UV exposure.

Very well explained with the pictures.

Ink stained Fingers said:

But the eyes can make quite big compromises in this respect so as long as you are not in the commercial printing business you can run some tests for yourself when you create profiles on your own - like D50 or D65 as the typical settings and different measuring settings like M1 or M2 - with or w/o inclusion of the OBA effect.

Click to expand...

If printing isn't the way you have to earn your money you just have to keep in mind the following:
Viewing conditions
You can use one single profile for any D class illuminants. You barely will notice the difference.
The same for F class.
The same for A (Tungsten)
Never use D or F profiles under A condition. D under F condition (and inverted) is possible, you can do it with the small difference.

Illuminant (The one which will be used to measure the colour)
If you don't know if your paper contains OBA or not better take M1 if your spectrophotometer is able to do so. Forget M2 as there is no interest when you are not in printing buisness or quality control.
For the owners of older spectrophotometers and i1Studio, you don't have the choice anyway. Take it or leave it.