Python GUI to generate TI1 files for ArgyllCMS and convert to i1profiler patch set

[oliver666]

Really cool project. ArgyllCMS is super powerful but not exactly user friendly, so having a GUI bridge to i1profiler sounds perfect.

 

[crenedecotret]

Really cool project. ArgyllCMS is super powerful but not exactly user friendly, so having a GUI bridge to i1profiler sounds perfect.

It might also be a good patch generator for a licensed i1Profiler user if a conditioning profile is NOT used but I haven't tested that theory.

I just wanted a GUI to scan in my patches with my new (to me) i1pro / efi es1000

 

[pharmacist]

Personally I think the ArgyllCMS patch generator is much more intelligent compared to the one by X-Rite i1Profiler. Especially the control of the amount of white/black patches and especially the amount of grey steps you can choose at will does indeed a better job in improving details in dark shadows. the i1Profiler patch generator is very rigid and you can only have a given amount of grey steps and given patch counts and the particular behaviour that sometimes choosing 1 extra patch removes all the grey and near neutral steps from the previous patch count. You would think that would add an extra grey step: unfortunately it is the opposite.

 

[crenedecotret]

Personally I think the ArgyllCMS patch generator is much more intelligent compared to the one by X-Rite i1Profiler. Especially the control of the amount of white/black patches and especially the amount of grey steps you can choose at will does indeed a better job in improving details in dark shadows. the i1Profiler patch generator is very rigid and you can only have a given amount of grey steps and given patch counts and the particular behaviour that sometimes choosing 1 extra patch removes all the grey and near neutral steps from the previous patch count. You would think that would add an extra grey step: unfortunately it is the opposite.

I noticed that... there was a thread on the luminous-landscape forum that details some "magic numbers" to follow for the number of patches in i1profiler. These magic numbers would be maximum neutrals and also a strict rgb grid, say 7x7x7 which is what i1profiler supposedly prefers and which is why i'm not sure that argyllcms patches would be better than the built in ones. I would probably need to run the same number of patches generated by argyllcms and i1profiler and for both, generate the profile in i1profiler to see which one is better.

Another thing in i1profiler is that it needs rgb values at the extremes 0-255. If not, i will simply barf while trying to make the profile. This is why you can't use a preconditioned ti1 files and expect a useable set of patches in i1profiler but It's perfectly fine to import in i1profiler to read them back and use them in argyllcms

 

[pharmacist]

I am not sure, but my guess is the ArgyllCMS method take into account the total amount of patches chosen by which the black/white points and the neutrals (greys) are deducted from the total patch count and the rest of the patches are divided equally in the RGB-space to maximally avoid each other (the distance in XYZ towards the nearest point is equally spaced using the -G argument in targen). On the other hand i1Profiler divides each XY, XZ and YZ surface in equally spaced points in each surface area: when the amount of patches is not equal to X=Y=Z (for example 8x8x8) the rest of the patches are on an extra XY, XZ or YZ surface and the whole thing is pressed together, making a profile where for example the XY points are closer to another than the XZ points, thus loosing the equally distributed points in the RGB color space. This is the reason you want to choose those "magic numbers with equally divided RGB values) to get the best of the interpolation in the XYZ space. ArgyllCMS will always distribute the points evenly in the XYZ color space independent from the patch count chosen. And another thing: the amount of grey steps you can choose independently from the total patch count, which is a great benefit. You can try the automatic patch generator of i1Profiler choosing 400 patches and choose for ArgyllCMS the following targen argument to compare with: targen -v -d2 -G -e3 -B3 -g51 -f400 400-target

This will give 400 patches of which 3 whites and 3 blacks and 51 grey steps deducted from the total of 400 patches making 343 patches to be divided in the RGB color space and this is exactly 7x7x7.

I am pretty sure the amount of grey steps with 400 patches with i1Profiler won't have 51 grey steps; this is the amount that is chosen by the QTR ABW-linearisation wedge with 51 grey steps from white to black in 2% steps.

Print a test image with a black and white strip that gradually increases from 100% white to 100% black to see if you see the gradual increase/decrease using both targets. I think this would be a legit test to see which patch generator is better: ArgyllCMS or i1Profiler