[Tool] ChromIQ – a macOS and Windows GUI for ArgyllCMS printer profiling (v3.8.0)

[itsab1989]

I am glad we got this sorted. New beta 27 with some refinements is out. I you have no further concerns I would release the final once we have implemented the presets you provide(d).
I am honestly not sure anymore: the wants that I have deactivated for now should work with this new setting right? In this case I will just make them active again. And in the ti2 layout editor I added the option to tag saved ti2s as randomized although they are not.

https://github.com/itsab1989/ChromIQ/releases/tag/v3.8.0-beta.31

 

[pharmacist]

Now we know the cause of the problems. I will do some extra testing to be sure and upload some extra presets too. Most probably I will upload special randomized TC9.18 target for which I have the pxf-file.

 

[itsab1989]

Now we know the cause of the problems. I will do some extra testing to be sure and upload some extra presets too. Most probably I will upload special randomized TC9.18 target for which I have the pxf-file.

In the latest release I loosened the restrictions with bi-directional a bit. I force it for i1Pro and give a one-time warning when it is active and a non-ranomized chart is loaded so the user is aware of this.
For the ColorMunki I did not force it but use the Argyll defaults now (neither -B nor -b).

In the ti2 layout editor there is now an option to force-tag a non-randomized chart as randomized so chartread will not disable bi-directional detection for it even if you don't use the argument to force it.
Basically the ti2 tells chartread that it is randomized although it is not (should have no influence on anything else, Claude says that it is only the tag that triggers this behaviour of chartread)

 

[pharmacist]

I have done several tests with the TC9.18 target and ArgyllCMS (via ChromIQ) really does not like gradual patch strips like the ones without scrambling from i1Profiler and in the end I decided to go for scrambling instead of preserve patch order:

This is the result of "preserve patch order" in softproofing (I have scanned it unidirectional, despite -b setting enabled):

And this version is when using scambled patch order in softproofing (using a modified TC9.24 with 3 extra blacks + 3 extra whites):

As you can see: ordered pxf patch sets from i1Profiler NEEDS scrambling when imported into ArgyllCMS ti1 format or you run in deep trouble.

Both patch sets are basically the same (only 3 extra blacks + whites in the lower scrambled version, which gives a perfect profile).

With this in mind I will start to make some new targets that @itsab1989 can implement in the newer versions of ChromIQ.

 

[itsab1989]

I have done several tests with the TC9.18 target and ArgyllCMS (via ChromIQ) really does not like gradual patch strips like the ones without scrambling from i1Profiler and in the end I decided to go for scrambling instead of preserve patch order:

This is the result of "preserve patch order" in softproofing (I have scanned it unidirectional, despite -b setting enabled):

View attachment 18763

And this version is when using scambled patch order in softproofing (using a modified TC9.24 with 3 extra blacks + 3 extra whites):

View attachment 18762


As you can see: ordered pxf patch sets from i1Profiler NEEDS scrambling when imported into ArgyllCMS ti1 format or you run in deep trouble.

Both patch sets are basically the same (only 3 extra blacks + whites in the lower scrambled version, which gives a perfect profile).

With this in mind I will start to make some new targets that @itsab1989 can implement in the newer versions of ChromIQ.

Wow, the first one looks really bad. But this is an Argyll issue then. At least we figured this out and know the culprit.

Looking forward to you targets. But if you don’t mind please don’t customize them too much in Photoshop because that might throw the highlighter off.

Doing some more minor tweaks right now and will then probably release 3.8.0 and make a note that your presets will be added after review or something.


Greatly apprechiated! Looking forward to it!

Edit:

Just made v3.8.0 the new latest stable release. Fingers crossed!

https://github.com/itsab1989/ChromIQ/releases/tag/v3.8.0

 

[pharmacist]

Alright folks,

I have made a new simple target based on the TC2.83 target of GretagMacbeth software and still included with the i1Profiler target. I have modified it to include extra grey steps and extra black and white patches. The target is for the Colormunki/i1Studio to be printed on a single sheet of A4/Letter. I think it should produce better results than the standard 50 + 50 patch method of the Colormunki/i1Studio with only single scan trip, so you can have the target properly dried (unlike the waiting step after the first scan, for which the 10 minutes recommended wait time is too short especially for dye inks, before the computer calculates the additional patches in order to smooth the final profile).

The original TC2.83 target (non-randomized):

Now my modified version which I have given the name TC3.00 (extra black/white patches and extra grey steps):

This is the same version (TC3.00) but now randomized and scanned with my i1Studio:

The scanning process on my i1Pro2 scanning board:

The resulting profile in softproofing:

Conclusion: approved !!!

 

[itsab1989]

Alright folks,

I have made a new simple target based on the TC2.83 target of GretagMacbeth software and still included with the i1Profiler target. I have modified it to include extra grey steps and extra black and white patches. The target is for the Colormunki/i1Studio to be printed on a single sheet of A4/Letter. I think it should produce better results than the standard 50 + 50 patch method of the Colormunki/i1Studio with only single scan trip, so you can have the target properly dried (unlike the waiting step after the first scan, for which the 10 minutes recommended wait time is too short especially for dye inks, before the computer calculates the additional patches in order to smooth the final profile).

The original TC2.83 target (non-randomized):

View attachment 18773

Now my modified version which I have given the name TC3.00 (extra black/white patches and extra grey steps):

View attachment 18774

This is the same version (TC3.00) but now randomized and scanned with my i1Studio:

View attachment 18772

The scanning process on my i1Pro2 scanning board:

View attachment 18775

The resulting profile in softproofing:

View attachment 18777

Conclusion: approved !!!

Very nice!

A minor request though. I like how you customize you charts. But some of those elements are almost certainly the reason that the highlighter during the measurement is off. It is either the text section on the right (which becomes an issue when the text is too big) or the the faint line under the strip indicator. I would try to train the recognition algorythm on this chart when you send it to me but if you could maybe remove the line complety or make the text a little smaller and see if this makes it better this would be very nice.


Edit:
One thing that just came to my mind: For those faulty charts - have you ever tried ChromIQ „Analyse Profile Quality“? I mean if the profile is totally off it just tell you that it is better to start over. But if only a few patches are off it should flag them and guide you through remeasurement.

Of course it is much better if the chart is layed out in a way that this is avoided. But it would be a good situation to test this feature.

 

[pharmacist]

I have tested it: the extra information on the right is discarded by ChromIQ. I only must not put text above the letters, for that the system will get confused. As long as there is nothing above the letters of the row it is ok. Therefore my new design targets take this into consideration.

 

[itsab1989]

Bit the highlighter touches the patches which it actually shouldn‘t do. Weird…

It should detect the bottom pixels of the strip letters and then place itself under it without touching the patches

 

[pharmacist]

OK, I have made 4 presets for ChromIQ:

2 for the Colormunki/i1Studio:

-1 page 300 patch target based on the TC2.83 (modified to include a few extra black and white patches + most importantly extra grey steps to improve grey separation).
-2 page 702 patch target based on the Spyderprint High Quality target but instead of RGB=5x5x5 increased to 7x7x7 + adapted Spyderprint Extended gray target included to improve black and white printing even with printers without grey inks.

2 for the i1Pro1/2/3:
-2 page 924 patch target based on the famous Gretag Macbeth TC9.18 target with a few extra black and white patches up to 924 patches in total.
-2 page 1140 patch target that I have designed based on RGB=9x9x9 + adapted Sypderprint Extended gray target to improve black and white printing even with printers without grey inks. This target should better to neutralise black and white printing than the TC9.24 target.

@itsab1989 : I will send you those targets to have a look at and implement them as presets.