[Nicholas Carchidi Participant Posts: 10]

General

on: February 24, 2024 at 10:56 pm

This comes off the heels of talking with Mark Segal in a previous thread. Creating a new post here so it’s more topic-specific.

So, I took the plunge and decided to read more about what basiCColor offers, specifically with Input 6 Pro. For the sake of brevity, I’ll refer to Input 6 Pro, simply as I6P throughout this post.

Before I go into detail, I emailed both basiCColor and Chromix sales and waiting for a response, asking if they offer any discounts for university students (as I am one) given IP6 is a pretty unaffordable solution for non-business/organization-type people ($800 per 1 license.)

I want to: Create an ICC profile for my LSI Advanced Target, Reflective 12641-2 layout, and profile with IP6 to align with the highest possible conformance standard options – FADGI, Metamoroze, or ISO criteria. In other words, if it’s only possible to align with ISO 19264 A with this target, then I profile for that. Or if it’s possible for FADGI tolerances then I profile for that, etc.

basiCColor offers a trial version, which I am using right now. And, after spending a few hours trying to learn how to use this, I have a few questions before I even *think* about finding a way to finance such an expensive piece of software (with or without any discounts, have no idea if they offer which is why I emailed sales – never hurts to ask.)

IP6 has Profiling and then Preset Editor. Is it practical, or even possible, to profile one of LSI’s advanced targets to conform to the tolerances for FADGI-level selection within IP6, even if I edit and/or adjust color patches that come back as being marked red?

Let’s say I profile for a ‘Custom’ output (under Quality Control selection) and ΔE 2000 (conformance standard selection) when building a profile. The Quantile Slider indicates 90% and ΔE of 4.0 as a resulting value once IP6 generates the ICC profile. Clicking the ‘report’ button generates an html file and indicates, *Custom QC failed*

To correct this, does this come down to simply adjusting the values for the color patches that are marked red until they turn green? Do I slide the Quantile slider all the way to 100% to reveal all the patches that don’t match the conformance tolerances and attempt to adjust each of their values?

After much back and fourth, LSI finally agreed to provide a .txt file that goes with my advanced target (they typically only provide .CxF)

I can successfully import this .txt reference file into IP6, but attempting to import the original CxF results in an error and it will not accept this. I have PatchTool from BabelColor, and analyzing the CxF, it appears normal without any malformation or errors. So, I am not sure why IP6 isn’t recognizing it? I can select it, but it doesn’t ‘stick’, and reverts back to the stock reference .txt provided by basiCColor for LSI’s 12641-2 layout.

See video for what I mean: https://youtu.be/r19_b-pSoa0

As an aside, I am actually quite disappointed by how buggy IP6 functions.

The dropdown menu for Reference File selection constantly closes itself and the interface is a bit slow at times (I’m on a machine running 64GBs of internal RAM; it’s not my machine. But I am on Windows 11. So, have no idea it that’s a possible reason.)

For $800.oo USD, I’d expect a seamless, smooth experience. However, the GUI and grid overlay on targets are fantastic. Aesthetically, this is what I would expect when paying for high-end software. The grid overlay is fluid in movement, and that’s very pleasing. I can zoom in very close when aligning the grid against patches which is ideal.

I admit, my knowledge for using IP6 correctly is limited and I am out of my depth here.

After doing some reading, I learned how difficult their licensing process has been for some since basiCColor permanently marks your machine using the machine’s dedicated hardware address. Talk about software limitations.

Any input and / or help would be greatly appreciated. I have ~13 days using trial mode.

-Nick

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 951]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #1 on: February 25, 2024 at 1:04 am

Firstly, it would be good to determine whether you need the Pro version. If not you can buy the standard version for 625. If all of these problems remain after having read the manual, I suggest you kindly address all these tech support issues to Chromix or to basICColor directly. It’s been quite a while back that I used this software to make profiles, it worked as indicated and as you may have read in the my article about it. I have not experienced the range of issues you report here, so I am not in position to provide the kind of tech support you appear to need. Sorry.

[Nicholas Carchidi Participant Posts: 10]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #2 on: February 25, 2024 at 1:21 am

Hey Mark, thanks for the prompt reply.

I’m wondering if this comes down to not being knowledgeable enough rather than actual software issues.

I took a look at the differences between Input 6 and Input 6 Pro, and noticed that the pro version allows for refinement of color patches and other color optimizations. The pro version also includes the options for the various standards.

Again, per what we talked about before, maybe this comes down to the layout from LSI vs something from HCT. Obviously, if the LSI target can’t benefit from trying to have it conform to a FADGI standard, for example, there’s no point in even considering purchasing Pro.

I’ll reach out to basiCColor on Monday and see what I can learn.

Thank you,

Nick

 

[Andrew Rodney Participant Posts: 416]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #3 on: February 25, 2024 at 1:33 pm

“As an aside, I am actually quite disappointed by how buggy IP6 functions.”

So reach out to BasICColor, and with that issue above, if you don’t get sufficiently helpful answers, move on. 

I’d also ask yourself what you ultimately hope to gain from such specific profiles and not necessarily put some ISO or other alignment into the mix.  Matching and certainly pleasing color results have nothing to do with necessarily gaining from that goal.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)”

[Nicholas Carchidi Participant Posts: 10]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #4 on: February 25, 2024 at 1:53 pm

Andrew – thanks. Yeah, I sent an email to BasICColor this morning and also reached out to Digital Transitions to see pool their feedback, too.

“I’d also ask yourself what you ultimately hope to gain from such specific profiles and not necessarily put some ISO or other alignment into the mix.  Matching and certainly pleasing color results have nothing to do with necessarily gaining from that goal.”

Well, at risk of chasing perfection, I am pushing the envelope as far as I can with the implements that I have. If it turns out that, using LSI’s advanced target, I can profile and conform to a specific standard, while achieving superior color reproduction results, then so be it. If it turns that I can’t, then that’ll tell me I’ve hit the ceiling on what I can achieve given the budget I am working with. I want to at least learn if it is possible.

In other words: Since I’m already this deep into it, might as well see if I can achieve even better color reproduction results than using a less sophisticated profiling method (while also aiming to align with a digital preservation standard.)

When I successfully imported the .txt reference file for the LSI target, it created a profile with a ΔE of 4.0 at 90% of the color patches. While OK, I want to see if better results are possible and – and also why Input 6 Pro rejects the CxF provided by LSI directly. It’s odd that it would reject the file.

Thanks,

Nick

[Andrew Rodney Participant Posts: 416]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #5 on: February 25, 2024 at 2:00 pm

This entire dE can be a rabbit hole that runs deep and provides nothing useful depending on the goals. Colorimetry, the creation of ICC profiles, and dE testing are about color perception. It is not about color appearance. The reason why viewing a print or even an image on-screen is more valid than measuring it is because the measurement is about comparing solid colors. Color appearance is about evaluating images and color in context, which measurement devices can’t provide. Colorimetry is about color perception. It is not about color appearance. Colorimetry was never designed as a color appearance model. It was never designed even to be used as an interchange space between device-dependent color models. It’s not designed for imagery at all. Colorimetry is based on solid colors in very specific ambient and surround conditions. Anytime one speaks of color accuracy NOT pleasing color; we need a way to define accuracy numerically (otherwise, we’re back to subjectivity). That’s where colorimetry comes to play. And there are NO rules in how a perceptual rendering from a profile is produced. Just like there are no rules in how E6 rendering (Velvia vs. Ektachrome) is produced. The profile maker and film manufacturer produce a rendering they feel their customers might prefer. So what is your definition of “better results” and how much time and money are you willing to spend IF indeed the goal is even possible.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)”

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 951]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #6 on: February 25, 2024 at 2:29 pm

That distinction between measuring solid colors on the one hand and colour evaluation in context on the other is really valid; however, guidance gleaned from the former CAN help point one to do things that improve one’s impression from the latter – for example making better profiles. So yes, it can be a rabbit hole if one lets the rabbits dig inappropriately, but it doesn’t have to be misused.

An average dE of 4 for a monitor calibration is not particularly good, especially recalling that an average means there are numbers above and numbers below. My monitor calibrations normally have average values of less than 1, and I know that’s the case for others with whom I’ve collaborated on such exercises. In a broad general sense, the risk of perceived incoherence between display colours and printed colours grows the higher the dEs.

As for the CxF business, you’d need to check with them what works with their software.

[Andrew Rodney Participant Posts: 416]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #7 on: February 25, 2024 at 3:07 pm

An average of 4dE, yes, but again, depending on the number of colors and where in color space they are! Many display dE reports use colors that are easy to hit (IOW, not saturated dark colors). You can if you desire, build average dE reports that look better than they really are if you want. This is why making your own sets of colors to target, the numbers (larger/better) make an avg dE report far, far more telling. Again, part of the rabbit hole many don’t look into deeply enough.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)”

[Franz Herbert Participant Posts: 12]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #8 on: February 26, 2024 at 6:28 am

Nicholas Carchidi wrote:

This comes off the heels of talking with Mark Segal in a previous thread. Creating a new post here so it’s more topic-specific.

So, I took the plunge and decided to read more about what basiCColor offers, specifically with Input 6 Pro. For the sake of brevity, I’ll refer to Input 6 Pro, simply as I6P throughout this post.

Before I go into detail, I emailed both basiCColor and Chromix sales and waiting for a response, asking if they offer any discounts for university students (as I am one) given IP6 is a pretty unaffordable solution for non-business/organization-type people ($800 per 1 license.)

I want to: Create an ICC profile for my LSI Advanced Target, Reflective 12641-2 layout, and profile with IP6 to align with the highest possible conformance standard options – FADGI, Metamoroze, or ISO criteria. In other words, if it’s only possible to align with ISO 19264 A with this target, then I profile for that. Or if it’s possible for FADGI tolerances then I profile for that, etc.

basiCColor offers a trial version, which I am using right now. And, after spending a few hours trying to learn how to use this, I have a few questions before I even *think* about finding a way to finance such an expensive piece of software (with or without any discounts, have no idea if they offer which is why I emailed sales – never hurts to ask.)

IP6 has Profiling and then Preset Editor. Is it practical, or even possible, to profile one of LSI’s advanced targets to conform to the tolerances for FADGI-level selection within IP6, even if I edit and/or adjust color patches that come back as being marked red?

Let’s say I profile for a ‘Custom’ output (under Quality Control selection) and ΔE 2000 (conformance standard selection) when building a profile. The Quantile Slider indicates 90% and ΔE of 4.0 as a resulting value once IP6 generates the ICC profile. Clicking the ‘report’ button generates an html file and indicates, *Custom QC failed*

To correct this, does this come down to simply adjusting the values for the color patches that are marked red until they turn green? Do I slide the Quantile slider all the way to 100% to reveal all the patches that don’t match the conformance tolerances and attempt to adjust each of their values?

After much back and fourth, LSI finally agreed to provide a .txt file that goes with my advanced target (they typically only provide .CxF)

I can successfully import this .txt reference file into IP6, but attempting to import the original CxF results in an error and it will not accept this. I have PatchTool from BabelColor, and analyzing the CxF, it appears normal without any malformation or errors. So, I am not sure why IP6 isn’t recognizing it? I can select it, but it doesn’t ‘stick’, and reverts back to the stock reference .txt provided by basiCColor for LSI’s 12641-2 layout.

See video for what I mean: https://youtu.be/r19_b-pSoa0

As an aside, I am actually quite disappointed by how buggy IP6 functions.

The dropdown menu for Reference File selection constantly closes itself and the interface is a bit slow at times (I’m on a machine running 64GBs of internal RAM; it’s not my machine. But I am on Windows 11. So, have no idea it that’s a possible reason.)

For $800.oo USD, I’d expect a seamless, smooth experience. However, the GUI and grid overlay on targets are fantastic. Aesthetically, this is what I would expect when paying for high-end software. The grid overlay is fluid in movement, and that’s very pleasing. I can zoom in very close when aligning the grid against patches which is ideal.

I admit, my knowledge for using IP6 correctly is limited and I am out of my depth here.

After doing some reading, I learned how difficult their licensing process has been for some since basiCColor permanently marks your machine using the machine’s dedicated hardware address. Talk about software limitations.

Any input and / or help would be greatly appreciated. I have ~13 days using trial mode.

-Nick

Hi Nick, I am the creator of input 6 and am here to help you. In order to see all you deltaE in the final window you should slide the dE slider all the way to 100%, then you will see all patches and their dEs. The source of color errors are manyfold, e.g. uneven lighting. Here is a link to a webinar I did for Pictas, it explains input 6 pro in detail and how to use the profiles in Adobe Camera Raw and CaptureOne. Feel free to contact me directly, you can also send me your Raw images if you want me to take a closer look.

Franz

[Franz Herbert Participant Posts: 12]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #9 on: February 26, 2024 at 7:50 am

Nicholas Carchidi wrote:

This comes off the heels of talking with Mark Segal in a previous thread. Creating a new post here so it’s more topic-specific.

So, I took the plunge and decided to read more about what basiCColor offers, specifically with Input 6 Pro. For the sake of brevity, I’ll refer to Input 6 Pro, simply as I6P throughout this post.

Before I go into detail, I emailed both basiCColor and Chromix sales and waiting for a response, asking if they offer any discounts for university students (as I am one) given IP6 is a pretty unaffordable solution for non-business/organization-type people ($800 per 1 license.)

I want to: Create an ICC profile for my LSI Advanced Target, Reflective 12641-2 layout, and profile with IP6 to align with the highest possible conformance standard options – FADGI, Metamoroze, or ISO criteria. In other words, if it’s only possible to align with ISO 19264 A with this target, then I profile for that. Or if it’s possible for FADGI tolerances then I profile for that, etc.

basiCColor offers a trial version, which I am using right now. And, after spending a few hours trying to learn how to use this, I have a few questions before I even *think* about finding a way to finance such an expensive piece of software (with or without any discounts, have no idea if they offer which is why I emailed sales – never hurts to ask.)

IP6 has Profiling and then Preset Editor. Is it practical, or even possible, to profile one of LSI’s advanced targets to conform to the tolerances for FADGI-level selection within IP6, even if I edit and/or adjust color patches that come back as being marked red?

Let’s say I profile for a ‘Custom’ output (under Quality Control selection) and ΔE 2000 (conformance standard selection) when building a profile. The Quantile Slider indicates 90% and ΔE of 4.0 as a resulting value once IP6 generates the ICC profile. Clicking the ‘report’ button generates an html file and indicates, *Custom QC failed*

To correct this, does this come down to simply adjusting the values for the color patches that are marked red until they turn green? Do I slide the Quantile slider all the way to 100% to reveal all the patches that don’t match the conformance tolerances and attempt to adjust each of their values?

After much back and fourth, LSI finally agreed to provide a .txt file that goes with my advanced target (they typically only provide .CxF)

I can successfully import this .txt reference file into IP6, but attempting to import the original CxF results in an error and it will not accept this. I have PatchTool from BabelColor, and analyzing the CxF, it appears normal without any malformation or errors. So, I am not sure why IP6 isn’t recognizing it? I can select it, but it doesn’t ‘stick’, and reverts back to the stock reference .txt provided by basiCColor for LSI’s 12641-2 layout.

See video for what I mean: https://youtu.be/r19_b-pSoa0

As an aside, I am actually quite disappointed by how buggy IP6 functions.

The dropdown menu for Reference File selection constantly closes itself and the interface is a bit slow at times (I’m on a machine running 64GBs of internal RAM; it’s not my machine. But I am on Windows 11. So, have no idea it that’s a possible reason.)

For $800.oo USD, I’d expect a seamless, smooth experience. However, the GUI and grid overlay on targets are fantastic. Aesthetically, this is what I would expect when paying for high-end software. The grid overlay is fluid in movement, and that’s very pleasing. I can zoom in very close when aligning the grid against patches which is ideal.

I admit, my knowledge for using IP6 correctly is limited and I am out of my depth here.

After doing some reading, I learned how difficult their licensing process has been for some since basiCColor permanently marks your machine using the machine’s dedicated hardware address. Talk about software limitations.

Any input and / or help would be greatly appreciated. I have ~13 days using trial mode.

-Nick

Hi Nick, I watched your video about importing a CxF file. The downloaded CxF file was actually converted into a CGATS formatted text file and then loaded, as R230215.txt

Franz

[Nicholas Carchidi Participant Posts: 10]

Re: basICColor Input 6 Pro – Requesting Guidance

Reply #10 on: February 26, 2024 at 1:29 pm

“Hi Nick, I am the creator of input 6 and am here to help you. In order to see all you deltaE in the final window you should slide the dE slider all the way to 100%, then you will see all patches and their dEs. The source of color errors are manyfold, e.g. uneven lighting. Here is a link to a webinar I did for Pictas, it explains input 6 pro in detail and how to use the profiles in Adobe Camera Raw and CaptureOne. Feel free to contact me directly, you can also send me your Raw images if you want me to take a closer look.”

Hey Franz, thank you for checking this thread and offering to help. I’m based in Philadelphia in the US, so we might be on different time zones. But usually get notifications/try to reply as soon as I can:

Yes – that’s what I was thinking, the color errors are due to uneven lighting. Currently, I am using the Epson v850 Pro flatbed scanner. Though it is prosumer device, I am aware there will be limits to what one can achieve vs. using DSLR/camera scanning. I’ll watch the webinar you did for Pictas to learn more, thanks.

CxF file: So, let me clear some confusion. The .txt reference file you see I had previously imported into the software before attempting to import the CxF. That’s why it is there. I was unaware that Input 6 Pro converts CxF to CGATS upon import.

This morning I started from scratch: Uninstalled the software, made sure to remove any temp files, and performed a clean install of Input 6 Pro. License still shows as active for the trial.

Here is a new video showing that when attempting to import the same CxF file, the software doesn’t respond to it. (I did not try to import the .txt / CGATS version of this same file previously to this, or after attempting this.) So, I am not sure why the CxF isn’t being recognized. The CxF comes directly from LSI and can be downloaded here, but I also provided my copy below: https://www.silverfast.com/it8calibration/en.html?get_reference=R230215

Video: https://youtu.be/Uc4KpaytPl8

Here are the files. They include:

LSI 12641-2 ref-color-chart-created-2024-02-21.tiff
R230215.cxf
R230215.txt
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1BfbGxcHxDALdxikYkAJTQ59g_vDTVeUR?usp=sharing

A word on the TIFF scan:

This was created in SilverFast Ai Studio 9 with parameters:

48-BIT HDR RAW
1200 DPI
Color Management turned off, no embedded profile
Internal Profile set to Adobe RGB 1998

Not sure how familiar you are with LSI’s SF, but HDR RAW is basically their way of saying a liner scan.

So, this scan has a Gamma value of 1.0. They expect the user to import HDR RAW files into their HDR Studio software to then correct for Gamma and set to 2.20, and finally export a copy that file as your TIFF (leaving the HDR RAW file untouched.)

This is the HDR RAW scan. So, Gamma 1.0, untouched, etc.
I am not sure if that would affect the ICC profile creation within Input 6, but thought I would mention it anyway.

Let me know what your thoughts are and the issue with importing the CxF.

Many thanks,
Nick

[Author]

Posts