ArgyllCMS and Calibration problem

[PAntunes]

Hi guys,

I've got a comormunki photo and was trying to profile a new paper on my printer. I've got a new computer so installed the latest version of the OEM software (ccStudio). I wasn't very happy with the profile. The blacks were too muted.

So looking around I found ArgyllCMS that should be more accurate. Gave it a go on my Canon Selphy and I really like the images from the ICC profile. But tried it on the Epson XP-970 and the ICC was just really bad.

Here's the soft proofing in Photoshop. Original on top and soft proof on the bottom. When printed, it does look like that.



Now I have blacks that are totally black, but then the strangest colours on the darker tones.

I used the command line option for Argyll for the calibration. Can anyone see anything I did wrong?

targen -v -d2 -G -g16 -f420 MarruttProGloss

printtarg -v -iCM -h -R1 -T300 -p A4 MarruttProGloss

(got two Tiff Files. Printed with Adobe Color Printer Utility on a Mac)

chartread -v -H -T0.4 MarruttProGloss

colprof -v -qm -r1.0 -S AdobeRGB.icc -cmt -dpp MarruttProGloss

Finally I do a final check on the profile

profcheck -k MarruttProGloss.ti3 MarruttProGloss.icc

Profile check complete, errors(CIEDE2000): max. = 1.851474, avg. = 0.329157, RMS = 0.385349


Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Apotheker]

I would suggest the following target:

targen -v -d2 -G -e5 -B6 -g128 -f480 -N0.75 desired_target_name

It produces 128 grey steps and emphasizes the neutral axis (important for neutral BW printing) by the -N0.75 argument.

I get very good profiles with this 480 patch target. I have a ready to use package using this set. I can send it to you.

 

[PAntunes]

I would suggest the following target:

targen -v -d2 -G -e5 -B6 -g128 -f480 -N0.75 desired_target_name

It produces 128 grey steps and emphasizes the neutral axis (important for neutral BW printing) by the -N0.75 argument.

I get very good profiles with this 480 patch target. I have a ready to use package using this set. I can send it to you.

Hi,

Thanks for this.

I've just tried it and on the first profile created I could still see it wasn't perfect. Better but still some parts that weren't great.

After reading the documentation a bit more, I've noticed that a profile can be used as a starting point for a new calibration. So I used this as a starting point and the second one seems to be much, much better. No crushed blacks, image with much less of a colour cast.

Tried a few different prints and so far, so good.