Correcting generated printer profiles

Am going to make a 'general' reply to all and I really do appreciate everyones input. Understand that my background (including Fuji) was back in the day's of Pterodacty’s :).  Alternative's - will give a look. Argyll CMS looks promising - command line does not brother me. Oris Color Tune not so much. More designed for press proofing and expensive. Parallel's - had not considered that as was under the impression only for runnings Window's - ugh. The other alternative I was looking at (using an upgraded 2012 Mac Pro) was designating one of the hard disc slots for OSX 10.6 and profile maker. But having to re-boot is PITA - which prompted my contacting you all.

The problem I have always run into with Graytag-McBeth and its sibling(s) from X-Rite can best be described is a slight to moderate ‘cross curve’ between highlights and shadow going to the red/magenta. My monitor is calibrated (and about every 6 weeks or so) using 1Profiler (i1Pro2 sensitometer) gives good gray scale reproduction. The profiled prints are close but no cigar. Upper part of a 21 step scale - steps 2- around 8 not bad. From that point on the shift to red/magenta of 2 to 4cc, visual, to steps 16/17. Steps 19, 20 and 21 are dark enough, under standard viewing conditions to pretty much mask the problem. As an aside - EK had this same problem with their internegative film (converting TX to a color negative). They wanted one to just use a densitometer to read the values produced by contact printing a silver based 21 step scale to produce the color printing pack required for use. Method had the same problems. Fortunately because of the film's design - changing the printing colors one could adjust the overall contrast for each one of the films color layers (c/m/y). Basically what we did optically was what one can do with Photoshop/Gimp using the curve controls. OTOH having a decent profile editor would have a lot of other benefits - such as ’tweaking’ a good profile for different paper surfaces and manufactures. Having the ability to control overall contrast, highlight to shadow gray reproduction and well as overall saturation and to specific areas of the color spectrum would allow one to ‘manipulate’ a good generic profile for different paper types and manufactures without having to generate specific profiles for each paper type/surface/maufacturer. Again this would only apply for  photographic uses.

Thanks to all for suggestions and possible solutions. Will tackle all of this as soon as I have finished the final restoration work on my 72 Citroen DS :).

Hello Neil - D50 is the standard. But changing color temp and/or spectral distribution affects all colors, not just gray's. The main problem I have always had with the profiling software from X-rite and its parent software from Graytag/McBeth is simply a 'cross curve' problem. While slight - on the order of 2 - 4 cc's (I know an old analog term) it is still annoying, at least to me. And it was a problem that Fuji corrected with profiling software developed back in the mid 90's (FFEI). When Apple went from the G4 to G5 - FFEI did not patch the program. One basic problem is that regardless of gray uniformity - people have different preferences for the 'color' gray or more precisely its tint. Problem we all faced back in the day's of Pterodacty’s. The inability to change, easily, overall gray tint with out materially affecting other colors - which should be fairly easy with digital - is not an option with X-Rite Profiler. Thanks for the info on Parallels - will give that a try. Did not consider that - thought it was only for running Windows - ugh…..

Steve Cook

Was somewhat afraid of that - I am a retired photo engineer - 20 years with Fuji - got out of the analog photo era just prior to the so-called digital revolution. Worked with FFEI (Fuji's electronic group out of England back in the 90's) helping with the development of the Frontier printers and profiling software. Most all of the old group I have contacted have said the same thing as I have - the best of current profiling software is OK but no cigars. The densitometers are not at all bad - it is just that computer programers, at least in my opinion, are not color specialist in the sense of what actually looks 'good'. Dead on color accuracy is needed in a lot of areas - but not necessarily photogarphy. Fuji's Velvia was a classic exaample.  Thanks for the quick response - guess am just going to keep on hasseling X-Rite :).