x rite i1 Basic Pro 2

[JFoerg]

Looking for some guidance on printer profiles and color management.
We use a Stratojet Shark printer with 4 colors plus white
We have Caldera as the RIP
Can't get colors to come out very accurately with the ICC profiles that came with the machine.
Caldera suggested we get the X Rite i1 Basic Pro 2 and make our own profiles.
How complex a process is this and how reliable is the new profile?
Thanks in advance

 

[AF]

Xrite or Barbierri are must-haves. You will figure it out once you start to use it. You can also take courses if needed. I find the Xrite is very simple to operate. I can’t comment on calderas process, but in general the profile creation process is straightforward. There is some black art involved, which you will learn as you progress along.

 

[ProColorGraphics]

Its not too bad. Doing UV is definitely different than with solvent. If you can swing it, the i1io table is definitely worth the extra money!!!

 

[Andy D]

I would say it's not an intuitive process, but once you create an ICC profile a couple times,
it becomes very easy... and actually becomes pretty tedious. I'm sure there's plenty of YouTube videos to walk you through.
I'm curious what others think the best model of X-rite is the best all-a-round one to own.

 

[Andy D]

Also adding, from my experience, when printing white it's doubly important create your own profiles.
I was surprised how much of a learning curve there was to color correct when adding white ink.
I really changes some colors dramatically & makes them look washed out, making the CMYK adjustments
much harder to get right.

 

[SignMeUpGraphics]

If you can swing it, the i1io table is definitely worth the extra money!!!

Oh how I wish we could afford one for the small amount of profiling we do. ~3000 patches at a time gets very tedious.
Huge thumbs up to anyone that has one

 

[ProColorGraphics]

The tech I had come help me said that most people use too many patches, which actually can make your profile worse! It is unnecessary and can lead to more errors and miscalculation of colors. He said that unless you have a high end print with the extra colors, don't do the highest number of patches.

 

[SignMeUpGraphics]

Sorry, should have said 2033 patches... for some reason ~7 years ago or so someone suggested it to be an ideal number of patches due it using the maximum amount of grey patches to get a good neutral profile.
We print a lot of high end artwork for our clients, and haven't had any complaints about the accuracy at all.
Just makes for a tired arm once every so often.

 

[Bly]

Our Oce colour guru said they tested the readings from the i1io table and found they were really inconsistent and it was a good thing I didn't buy one.

 

[chafro]

Barbieri makes the best spectrophotometers out there. But they aren’t cheap. We have
the LPF and has save us many many days of manually reading patches over the years.

A big plus is it has transmissions readings also to make backlighting ICCs. It’s amazing how a good transmission ICC upgrades the backlight quality. Original printers backlight ICCs are very bad and wastes tons of unnecessary ink.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ProColorGraphics]

Our Oce colour guru said they tested the readings from the i1io table and found they were really inconsistent and it was a good thing I didn't buy one.

That seems odd that the table would make the readings off since it's still using the i1 pro2 to get the color information. The table is just an automation device.

 

[Pauly]

Calibrating UV printers is quite different than solvent / ink jets. UV printers wont show bleeds or artefacts in ink limits. Different software will treat densities differently.
I personally dont see the point in using patches larger than a IT8.7/4 target (1617 patches) or a ECI2002 (1484 patches) patch set.
For injet though you generally would use more.

Using the i1pro or i1pro 2 it is recommended to do at least 2 measurements and average them out for user error.

Is it easy to make a profile? Yes
Is it easy to make a good profile? Depends with software.
Are there tutorials how to make a profile? yes, but only to teach you how to use the software and now how to make a good profile.

I use the Barbieri LFP RT v3 and Spectropad. Both not cheap devices but excellent at reading patches. But IMO everyone wants one, but most people don't actually need it.

Weird that the i1io is in-accurate. Probably a software glitch?? It would be a great addition. I've seen onyx do some funny thing with my Barbieri devices. So i do measurements outside of onyx then import the files. It doesn't take much longer.

 

[Bly]

That seems odd that the table would make the readings off since it's still using the i1 pro2 to get the color information. The table is just an automation device.

Maybe the table mechanism lets light in when measuring?

 

[AF]

The i1 has a smaller aperture than what is available on the Barbierri, so this restricts the quality of readings on certain materials and/or printers.

 

[Pauly]

Maybe the table mechanism lets light in when measuring?

It shouldn't. unless setup wrong. It does read quite fast IMO. It could be the patch size being to small, especially if he's using it with the arizona.
It reads quicker than the LFP. It does have different measurement modes, but the continuous is the quickest speed, but still slower as it does pause on every patch for half of a second.
I wouldn't rule out the i1io because of one person IMO. Great device. And trust me, if you read a lot of patches quite often, it does free up some times.

The i1 has a smaller aperture than what is available on the Barbierri, so this restricts the quality of readings on certain materials and/or printers.

Not exactly right.
My Barbieri LFP has a 2,6 & 8mm variable aperture. My spectropad has a 6mm aperture.
The i1 Pro 2 has a 4mm aperture.

For printing with solvent printers/ink jets on smooth surfaces which is what 90% of people do here, a 4mm or 2mm aperture is fine. Any measurement errors will be from the user, that's why it's generally recommended to do 2 measurements and average them out.

UV printers you require at least 4mm aperture as the pigments are larger and can cause reading errors.

 

[AF]

It shouldn't. unless setup wrong. It does read quite fast IMO. It could be the patch size being to small, especially if he's using it with the arizona.
It reads quicker than the LFP. It does have different measurement modes, but the continuous is the quickest speed, but still slower as it does pause on every patch for half of a second.
I wouldn't rule out the i1io because of one person IMO. Great device. And trust me, if you read a lot of patches quite often, it does free up some times.



Not exactly right.
My Barbieri LFP has a 2,6 & 8mm variable aperture. My spectropad has a 6mm aperture.
The i1 Pro 2 has a 4mm aperture.

For printing with solvent printers/ink jets on smooth surfaces which is what 90% of people do here, a 4mm or 2mm aperture is fine. Any measurement errors will be from the user, that's why it's generally recommended to do 2 measurements and average them out.

UV printers you require at least 4mm aperture as the pigments are larger and can cause reading errors.

It’s much more than this. Canvas and textured media benefit from the larger aperture of the Barbierri. Even latex benefits on a smooth substrate due to the monster drop size and micro coalescing.

 

[Pauly]

It’s much more than this. Canvas and textured media benefit from the larger aperture of the Barbierri. Even latex benefits on a smooth substrate due to the monster drop size and micro coalescing.

Oh trust me, i know. I use all 3 apertures for different types of media. I've also tested different apertures on different medias to see what works best.
I1pro 2 is a good entry level all round device. Most will never need more than that.

 

[AF]

I totally agree. But it would be nice if X-rite offered alternate apertures. The nose piece comes off already, wouldn’t be too difficult to offer it.

 

[ColorCrest]

Can't get colors to come out very accurately with the ICC profiles that came with the machine.

Understand that for your machine to produce the same colors as the "canned" ICC profiles from the mfr., your machine would require the same ink / media / calibration circumstances. IOW, using the same ink and media, if the factory machine printed a certain density and neutrality of a particular gray tone when they generated their ICC profile for a given setup, your machine would need to closely produce that gray as well as other colors and gamut. The factory used a certain calibration upon which their ICC profile was based.

So begs the question; How do you know if your machine is using the same calibration? (Print your control image file and make a judgement as the first step.)

How complex a process is this and how reliable is the new profile?

As other have mentioned, the process can grow to be complex but is a step-by-step process that novices can achieve.

The ICC profile is valid (reliable) for as long as one can keep the machine in the same state of calibration as when the profile was generated and that may be for years.

So begs the question; How do you know if your machine is using the same calibration? (Print your control image file.)

 

[ColorCrest]

It’s much more than this. Canvas and textured media benefit from the larger aperture of the Barbierri. Even latex benefits on a smooth substrate due to the monster drop size and micro coalescing.

To easily see the affects of color sampling complications using current spectrophotometers, simply try looking at the given media with a 8X or greater loupe and 1 or 2 angled light sources. Just about any media except a glossy photo print media will exhibit significant specular highlights and some shadows. Larger apertures will just see more of the same. To overcome the anomalies, a polarized light source would be required by the reading device as well as software attention.

Current suppliers don't seem to entertain that notion and it's understandable but only because of economics.