In my RIPs, I have the ability to set the inkjet dot gain characteristic of my media linearization profile.
Since I also use output profiles, what difference does it make if I choose 0% dot gain, or 10% dot gain, or 20% dot gain, or even 40% dot gain?
In a color managed workflow, doesn’t the output profile ultimately determine the tonal linearity of the printed image?
Is this a “to linearize or not to linearize” question? If so, you could certainly profile a device without linearization, and maybe even get acceptable results. I think you’ll likely get better behavior out of a linearized device though, as well as the ability to re-linearize later to compensate for drift as opposed to reprofiling (and copying a new profile to all applicable destinations).
At 10:20 AM -0700 7/15/05, Michael Eddington wrote:
Is this a “to linearize or not to linearize” question? If so, you could certainly profile a device without linearization, and maybe even get acceptable results. I think you’ll likely get better behavior out of a linearized device though, as well as the ability to re-linearize later to compensate for drift as opposed to reprofiling (and copying a new profile to all applicable destinations).
yeah, I agree with Mike…
another point is that the more non-linear your device is when profiling, the harder the profile has to work for good color.
In practice we have found that the more linear - and gray balanced - a device is prior to profiling, the better the profile.
Regards,
Steve
o Steve Upton CHROMiX www.chromix.com
o (hueman) 866.CHROMiX
–
Post generated from email list
My question is not whether or not I should linearize.
Sounds like this may be a Rip specific question as I’m not familiar with those options. The answer may well be the same though…The profile in the end determines the tonality, but choosing a gain closer to the desired output before profiling makes less work for the profile. Am I in the ball park, or completely missing your point? 
Mike, I can’t see your winking since you insisted on wearing those darn sunglasses. How come you’re wearing those things indoors, anyhow?
Indeed, my question is RIP specific.
I’m wondering if I’d get the same printed results after profiling if my dot gain curve was set to 0% as I would if it were set to 40%.
What do you think?
(I only wish I had the time to burn to discover the answer for myself…)
At 1:10 PM -0700 7/15/05, christ0pher wrote:
Mike, I can’t see your winking since you insisted on wearing those darn sunglasses. How come you’re wearing those things indoors, anyhow?
Indeed, my question is RIP specific.
I’m wondering if I’d get the same printed results after profiling if my dot gain curve was set to 0% as I would if it were set to 40%.
What do you think?
yes… I suspect you would.
In most cases in color management I find that speculation holds true. In many cases, however, I’m very glad I tried things that, at the time, I though would do exactly the opposite of what I wanted.
Regards,
Steve
o Steve Upton CHROMiX www.chromix.com
o (hueman) 866.CHROMiX
–
Post generated from email list
In practice we have found that the more linear - and gray balanced - a device is prior to profiling, the better the profile.<<
Steve,
I have always wondered on what you mean by “gray balanced - a device is prior to profiling”.
With so many different ink and media combination (especially in large format) I have always taken the approach of calibrating to a visual standard with some dot gain. I do not calibrate to a true linear output. I then generate my profile. A good profile should give me the correct recipe for gray. In fact that is one of the first things I test for.
Do you see something wrong with this approach. I have been creating profiles for many years with good success with this methodology.
What standard are you gray balancing to? Using what tools?
Regards,
Rich