I was wondering why the manual instructs to print the ICC patches out of Adobe Print Utility instead of just printing out of print tool with no color management. Don’t both programs circumvent the background OSX color management in the same way? I’ve been printing color patches out of print tool for a long time under that assumption.
Thanks!
Xander
If you’re using the Piezography ICC Tool, make sure you’re printing the correct patches (RGB tagged not Grayscale tagged or null tagged). See Walker’s post (ACPU). I believe this recommendation is specific to this Piezography tool and not to regular RGB profiling. Walker may chime in with additional information.
Also remember, Piezography ICC workflow is NOT linear but probably good for PL clients as it is a screen match. You may want to look into the luminance matching tool as well (my two cents).
-A
Both regular color profiling and Piezography RGB ICC (i1Profiler) profiling should be printed from ACPU and not Print-Tool. When no color management is selected in print-tool, it converts all colors to sRGB which is then canceled out with a secondary conversion to sRGB in colorsync thus creating a “null transform” color out of the system to the printer. This is not ideal for icc profiling as you will have a lack of gamut.
ACPU does something different. We have verified this at Cone Editions.
best,
Walker
WOW thank you! This will change a whole lot of things in several of our workflows. If this is for regular inkjet forum, I’d understand, but I’ve always been curious-- If some amount of background color management is happening printing out of photoshop, why would one want to circumvent that to print the patches? I understand the ideology of completely unfettered printer managed colors, but doesn’t the background color management then go and blight all the color images I then print out of photoshop with that profile?? In theory, wouldnt it only operate optimally if I could print with an ICC without the OS introducing it’s own color management?
Photoshop does not allow for No Color Management because of the shifty nature of enforced color-sync in OS X. (thus the reason why Adobe came out with ACPU after OS X 10.6).
best,
Walker
I know, but if all of your images printed out of photoshop will invariably go through the background color management, why wouldn’t you print the patches via photoshop? (yes, I know, the idea is to profile the printer with no management of any kind, but this background color management seems as much a fixed variable of what the “printer” thinks things should look like as much as any of the physical / environmental stuff that the ACPU method seeks to isolate). Nah mean ¿
So like why eliminate this background color management if all of our actual images will have to go through it?
Because photoshop does not apply a null-set profile. In other words, you can’t profile for the profile that Photoshop/OSX applies by default when printing with “Printer Manages Color” because once you’ve built a profile, Photoshop uses THAT instead of that + the weirdo profile that you used with the original target patches out of Photoshop.
-Walker