If you've only run into two images in two months, that's probably as good as you can hope for as when you would choose RC over P is going to be subjective... as is the algorithm.  It is based on how much of the image is out of gamut and where the out of gamut areas occur.  More weight is given to the center for example so it would allow more out of gamut near the edges than it will allow in the center.  It's also a tradeoff between losing a little in out of gamut areas with RC versus desaturating the entire image (even in gamut colors) with P so that's a subjective threshold as well.

I will say that if nothing shows out of gamut, then nothing is really out of gamut BUT the new LCMS 2.17 color management engine does fix/improve the out of gamut warnings and that will be in QU 2025.102 which is in the very final stages of testing and I hope to get out tomorrow.  So be sure to retest when that is out.

P.S. To be honest, I just use RC all the time unless I see a specific problem with colors and that usually only happens with images that are filled with bright saturated colors.  With RC at least you know if the color can be rendered by your printer (it is not out of gamut) it will be rendered accurately.  With perceptual, literally nothing is rendered accurately: even the in gamut colors that could be printed correctly are shifted.  It fools our eyes because it's a relative shift of the whole image but I just like knowing that my printer rendered everything it can render accurately and I don't mind out of gamut colors being a little clipped.  That's usually less objectionable than desaturating the whole image a little like perceptual does.  That's pretty much how the auto intent works: it won't "give up" on RC unless there's quite a bit out of gamut that might produce objectionable banding or clipping when using RC with out of gamut colors.

Regards,
Mike

Gonna need a little more than 9 words on that one.   

Save a TIFF from what?  What are you doing?  Editing an image?  You want to save a layout (print to file)?  Want to batch convert?

Please give a little info.

Regards,
Mike

This topic has been moved to Qimage Ultimate.

https://ddisoftware.com/tech/index.php?topic=4693.0

How do I save a file as a TIFF

Mike,

I love the Auto option when soft proofing.   I print images for others (non-commercial) and they say I do better than the commercial printers do -- and I explain it is because of Qimage.
I run every image I print through QU soft proof, note the rendering intent chosen by Qimage, and then go to the Mac version and plug that RI in.    Usually works beautifully.   

But I've had two images in two months where Auto chose Relative Colorimetric, and it should have been Perceptual.   

Do you know of cases where the Auto algorithm makes assumptions that might not be right?
The images have deeply saturated dark colors; but the Gamut warning does not show them as being out of gamut.
I am printing to a profiled paper (Canon Polypropylene Matte) and normally it works superbly. 

I can upload the images if you'd like.   I can even take pictures of the difference between RC and Perceptual when printed.   The difference is subtle, but these are very subtle images sometimes.

I am somewhat of a Canon fanboy (PRO-2000, G620, iP100) but I used to run some Epson machinery when I worked in a retail drylab (SC-P6000, SL-D3000, SL-D700) and was quite fond of those. I am picking up an 8550 secondhand (with a good nozzle check in hand of course) and appreciate the profiles for this Canon paper quite immensely. If I can get away with it, I would like to keep using Canon papers as in my experience, they're quite nice and a good value. Cheaper than Epson papers from what I've seen. Especially since I have several Canon machines as well.

I have a not-insignificant pile of Canon paper and was wondering if it would be possible to "donate" some to get more profiles made for the 8500 series. Particularly the Canon Glossy, Plus Glossy II, and Matte Photo papers are not listed and I have a decent stock of LTR sheets for all of them.

I would be happy to spend the supplies to make some swatches, and cover shipping them to be made into profiles for this repo. I don't have the resources to make the profiles myself, but I can put ink on paper.

Please let me know if that's of any interest.

BRW

Thank you for your advice, Mike!

You can do it but you are going to have to control the order.  What I would do is create two jobs like this:

Job8163
Job2745

Set both jobs up landscape and have both jobs contain 2 pages where the first job (Job8163) has templates for photos 8 and 1 on the first page and 6 and 3 on the second page.  Make sure you drag and drop photo 8 and photo 1 on the first page and photo 6 and 3 on the second page.  Or just click on the + button on the thumbnails for photo 8, photo 1, photo 6, and photo 3 and they will go in that order.  Print and flip the pages over, feed them back into the printer on the opposite sides, and repeat for Job2745 placing photos 2 and 7 on the first page and photos 4 and 5 on the second page.

The job names should help you remember which photos go in and in which order.  You'd have to get used to how to flip the sheets making sure to get the order correct but once you get the hang of it, it should be pretty simple.

Regards,
Mike

Does Qimage have a functionality to arrange images on pages in a way that after double-sided printing one could make a brochure or a book?

For example, for a book of 8 pages it is needed 2 sheets of paper:
Page 1, 1 side: image 8 in the left column and image 1 in the right column;
Page 1, 2 side: image 2 in the left column and image 7 in the right column;
Page 2, 1 side: image 6 in the left column and image 3 in the right column;
Page 2, 2 side: image 4 in the left column and image 5 in the right column.

I've attached an image to show what I mean.

Hi Mike,

Thank you for your answer.

I hoped for a trick of some but know at least  I know how to do it!.

Kind regards,

Bert

PS Qimage is not the easiest of software to use but I start to appreciate it more and more of what it does do and thats quite a bit :-).