Onyx/Epson VarDot profile

[SWCL]

Instrament config is...

Eye One Pro
Reflection (ticked)
Spectural (ticked)

Spot measurement is...

Colorimetric
Lch
2 deg
D50
Delta E2000

Numbers for C & M taken from second figure down (next to swatch boxes) which I assume is the C reference as it appears below - where it just shows how many DE difference there is between the reference & sample.

Canvas is matte & textured.

I've seen from other posts you talk about using a polariser filter on the device itself.. we don't have that with our eye one, but could a polarizing filter for a camera lens work.. & would it help?

The Chroma figures for Cyan go up before they start coming down. At 100% the figure is 58.9, at 84% the figure has gone up to 60! then falls slowly (with a couple of +.2/.3 DE fluctuations on the way down). Its not until 62% where it is at the same DE as it was at 100% - & as I say, not until 35% ish does it stop fluctuating & continuosly falls... when it is then a considerable drop per patch (1 DE or more, lower)

[eye4clr]

At 100% the figure is 58.9, at 84% the figure has gone up to 60! then falls slowly

AH HA!

Take the highest measurement as the "100%" reference. Your ultimate goal is to max gamut and minimize ink use. To max the gamut you need to find the max Chroma value. Then see how far down you can go on ink before you have a perceivable difference in chroma (delta E = 1)

I bet you'll end up with a higher C. As a result, you may end up bringing up the Y to balance the CMY grey as well.

[SWCL]

I did wonder if that might be the cause - thought it was a bit odd as the magenta ramp chroma just got lower

Plumped for these settings then..

C = 62% (186/300), M = 88% (264/300), Y = 56% (168/300), K = 96% (288/300)

C1 = 100, C2 = 86, C3 = 0
M1 = 100, M2 = 100, M3 = 64
Y1 = 100, Y2 = 68, Y3 = 0
K1 = 100, K2 = 100, K3 = 88

Light inks set at 90% less than dark ink '1' values which are all 100.. so all light inks are Lx2 (x = colour) 90, Lx1 = 90% less than Lx2 = 81.

The CMY ramp looks a little greeny around 55% but the rest of it is pretty neutral, the light patches are a little red if anything, but I asume that can be ironed out at a later stage, as any adjustment I make doesn't seem to make a great deal of difference & I dont want to stray too far from the measured DE values for the C & M.

So, on the basis that the above is correct, I shall move to the 'Calibration' step. But before I print that - how should the eye one be set up to read it?

Got it set to Eye One Strip, read by strip, 1 reading per patch (31 patches per ink), prefered measurement mode = Colorimetric (CIELAB D50) - is that right or should it be Spectural?

[eye4clr]

You're good on the i1 setup.

Don't sweat the midtone and lighter areas when evaluating the ink restriction since it's the linearization's job to correct that. You need to focus on the darkest area you can still distinguish color in. That's where you want the balanced grey. If it still looks green, take out more Y.

[M.A.C.]

FWIW, Yellow restrictions are my toughest part of profiling. I always have difficulty distinguishing if the darker patches are on the green/blue side. Thank god the icc seems to be able to do a good job of straightening these things out

[eye4clr]

use the Measure Tool/i1 to get the hue measurement in LCH if you're doubting what color the darker patches are.

think of these values on a circle like compass headings....
0/360 = red
45 = orange
90 = yellow
135 = green
180 = cyan
225 = blue
270 = violet
310 = magenta
360/0 = red

that together with the chroma value tell you what color it is and how far saturated toward that color.

Then use this little gem to adjust accordingly. The arrangement here is one of opposites.
R <-> C
G <-> M
B <-> Y

So lets say you read the H and find a value of 140. Well, that's kinda green. Since you've got CMY to work with, you're either going to add green's opposite of M or reduce C and Y, effectively having more M by proportion.

Damn, i gotta stop giving this stuff away. My wife would kill me.

[SWCL]

Once I'm sorted you can hide the thread

My boss is allergic to spending money - getting me training in profiling is a distant dream, so this unfortunately is the only way I'm going to learn!

I'm just greatfull that there is someone out there who knows what they're talking about & is willing to share their knowledge

Plus, I dread to think what you'd charge to fly to the UK to help us out! :P

I shall continue on - from here on in I think it should be pretty simple, its just getting the restrictions right in the first place that seems most vital. But if I get stuck I'll be sure to let you know

[SWCL]

Having some obscure banding issues (latteral banding caused by vibration when the carrige moves left to right) which was really evident on Wednesday when printing a canvas (old profile) just using black - & it is still noticable in the Calibration swatch..

Thats probably why when I got to the build lineraization step, I was greeted by a FLOCK of seaguls! (see attached)

[eye4clr]

what's interesting is the seagulls are upside down.

Is there banding in gradients printing with just linearization alone? (no icc) If so, those damn gulls are a problem. If not, carry on.

[SWCL]

Did all the steps following that (prior to icc) & printed the default test image.. seemed pretty good apart from the Shell & the eye on the left - didn't notice any banding.

Continued to do the icc & finish the profile & noticed that what was being measured wasn't indentical to the expected result... most colours seem pretty close - just really dull (no contrast) although as you can see with some of the greens.. were WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY off (see attached)

All in all, the profile gives a pretty decent result - a vast improvement on the.. use the default profile & put in a correction amount by doing lots & lots of test prints & settling for what we can get away with as a barely acceptable result.. that we were doing before.

One thing I would say - the pre icc test print (printed with icc profiles off) is a little lighter than the post icc (printed with all profiles on) test print. My concern being that for example the pic with the wine & cheese was pretty much spot on for lightness before icc.. & too dark afterwards

Settings:

After the linearization was done I left the ink limit set on basic - on the default '4' with 'allow mod of GCR to meet limit' off, then did first test print.

Printed icc swatches, set to.. eye one strip, standard 914 patches, scrambled swatch.

read swatch options.. custom, 41, v.4, classic, use large input (tick), balance CMY grey (tick), Total Ink limit 290%*, Achromatic Black = start 50, max 100, moderate generation, use UCR (unticked), Chromatic Black = enable (tick), start 65, max 100, moderate gen.

*which I determined by looking at the ink limit swatch - I used the measure tool in PM5 again set the target as the R+K line, then measured the K+R+C line agaisnt it.. then the same for G+K & B+K... 2.90 was the point at which there was as close to 0 DE difference between the two patches on each of the lines. Not read to do this anywhere - just thought I'd give it a shot & use those results - be it wrong or not.. with my limited knowledge though it did seem the right thing to do.. having found there was a point at which there was no difference between the two patches

Built the icc, did the second test print - now a bit too dark.. is there anything I can change when doing the icc to get it a little lighter?

just before I get a reply for this query - a big thanks to eye4clr & all that posted in this thread - you have been a massive help! I'm as happy as a pig in poop!