I was hoping someone could shed some light as to whether or not something was possible before I spend too much time trying it. I am working on a Mac OS 10.11 and have set up an Epson 7800 with Special Edition Inks using the P2 configuration. I want to practice creating (or editing existing) QTR profiles however I’d like to use the curve editor GUI which is only available on Windows. Therefore, I am running a virtual Windows machine (Windows 10) on my Mac. I get errors when I attempt to open existing P2 .quad files in the curve editor in Windows likely as it is expecting a .qidf file.
Is it possible to edit a .quad P2 curve in the Windows curve editor, then bring it back to a Mac for printing?
Thanks a bunch.
The short answer is no. You will find the the long answer under the heading “The Problem” at the beginning of this blog post.
Thanks Brian. That article was helpful.
There was a similar question over on the Yahoo QTR forum. It wasn’t clear to me whether you were involved in that. It also wasn’t clear what sort of editing either you or the Y-QTR poster were looking to perform. For Piezography curves, mostly what you’d want to do is relinearise the curve, and the blog post goes on to describe how to do that with current technology. Not sure what else you’d want to do. On occasion I’ve had issues with the black ink limit on some papers, but I suspect that would be hard to deal with by simple edits to a .quad file. I’ve also had issues with ink overloading on a thin paper like EEM in the distant past, and had some success in dealing with that by hacking the .quad file to scale it down a little, but you’d have to be fairly desperate to try that. Other than relinearisation, the system is supposed to be plug and play.
I’ve been working of-late on a second generation of master curves that have linear TIL (total ink limit) but that is a ways off . . .
For now, relin using the Quad-Linearize droplet. It’s important to choose the correct curve for you printer/paper.
O.K. Walker, so to “re-linearise” for a new paper, I can use the x880-x890 Gloss ( or Matt) Master Curves as supplied with the Deluxe Manual? Also I noticed a potential typo on pg 62 between the input/output levels on the curves chart and the text giving output of L234 as darker than input of L224. Unless I am missing something ( entirely possible ) shouldn’t it be the otherway around?
Actually, you don’t need to use a master curve. Simply use the one that is built for your paper or that is built for a paper that is very similar to your paper.
I’m editing for typos tomorrow. Thanks for the note, I’ll check it out.
All good now. If you want a heads up on questions that technology challenged people like me will ask, I can give you some insight as to some clarifications that would help with the Manual.It wouls probably save you guys ( and gals as well, Dana ) from having to respond to some questions that you take for granted, and frustration on the part of the newbies.
Also why ColorPort rather than i1-Pro besides its less complicated? Any real world difference between the ColorPort and i-! using spot ( and paper type- glossy/matt/plain ) ?
Can you elucidate on ‘buggy’? My recent experience with an i1p2 on an io is that has been excellent. Scanning b&w targets just works. I do use saved workflows so I don’t have to set up each time.
About 1/2 of everyone who I’ve seen install i1Profiler on OS X has gotten to wheel of death after going into profiling tab that is un-resolvable even after re-install.
The newest update may have solved this FYI.
ColorPort runs in Java so is essentially running on a “virtual machine” that is independent of what OS you are using. Essentially it’s future-proof.
Thanks Walker. I must have been lucky. I tried ColorPort years ago and found it to be really clunky. Profiler has a bit of a learning curve but improves once you get the idea of wodkflows.