jctay
Getting Fingers Dirty
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2026
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 20
- Printer Model
- Canon Selphy CP1500
Questions on Custom Printer Profile Validation and Measurement Conditions
I would appreciate some advice on the best approach for validating a custom ICC printer profile, particularly regarding analytical verification and measurement conditions.
1. Analytical Validation vs. Visual Evaluation
When validating a custom printer profile, do you normally perform an analytical evaluation by comparing the measured ΔE2000 values against the ColorChecker 24 (CC24) reference values, or do you rely primarily on visual evaluation of the printed target?
In particular, is there a generally accepted ΔE2000-based methodology or tolerance for determining whether a custom printer profile is performing satisfactorily?
2. Appropriate Measurement Condition for Profile Validation
I created my printer profile using M1 measurements. However, when subsequently measuring the printed CC24 target for validation, I have noticed that M2 (UV-cut) consistently produces lower ΔE2000 values than M0 or M1.
This raises a question about which measurement condition should be used for profile verification.
Should validation be performed using the same M1 measurement condition used to create the profile, so that the verification is consistent with the profiling data?
Or is it technically valid to use M2 (UV-cut) for validation if it produces a better numerical agreement with the CC24 reference values, even though the ICC profile itself was built from M1 measurements?
I am particularly interested in understanding whether the measurement condition should be considered part of the profiling/validation chain, or whether the validation condition can be selected independently based on which condition provides the most meaningful assessment of the printed colors.
Any practical experience or recommendations would be greatly appreciated.
I would appreciate some advice on the best approach for validating a custom ICC printer profile, particularly regarding analytical verification and measurement conditions.
1. Analytical Validation vs. Visual Evaluation
When validating a custom printer profile, do you normally perform an analytical evaluation by comparing the measured ΔE2000 values against the ColorChecker 24 (CC24) reference values, or do you rely primarily on visual evaluation of the printed target?
In particular, is there a generally accepted ΔE2000-based methodology or tolerance for determining whether a custom printer profile is performing satisfactorily?
2. Appropriate Measurement Condition for Profile Validation
I created my printer profile using M1 measurements. However, when subsequently measuring the printed CC24 target for validation, I have noticed that M2 (UV-cut) consistently produces lower ΔE2000 values than M0 or M1.
This raises a question about which measurement condition should be used for profile verification.
Should validation be performed using the same M1 measurement condition used to create the profile, so that the verification is consistent with the profiling data?
Or is it technically valid to use M2 (UV-cut) for validation if it produces a better numerical agreement with the CC24 reference values, even though the ICC profile itself was built from M1 measurements?
I am particularly interested in understanding whether the measurement condition should be considered part of the profiling/validation chain, or whether the validation condition can be selected independently based on which condition provides the most meaningful assessment of the printed colors.
Any practical experience or recommendations would be greatly appreciated.