Change is hard. I like some aspects of my old pm5 colorful gamut mappings (gentle contrast curve and aggressive colors), but I also like some aspects of my new i1p gamut mappings (deep black and pleasing shadows). So, a Frankenstein experiment… duplicate my AdobeRGB image, convert one copy to printer space using pm5 mapping and the other copy to printer space using i1p mapping. Untag both copies, layer one at 50% opacity atop the other and flatten. Send RGB values to the printer without any processing. Assuming linearity, this should yield the middle ground, right? And it does. Might be crazy, but I find comfort in knowing that I CAN slice change into pieces.
We were wondering if you have some secret bugging device implanted in the CHROMiX board room? We were discussing this very concept just a few days before your post. Yes, the idea of combining the effects of different rendering intents has been pursued by some who are willing to do some extra work. Your workflow sounds good and should work well. You could even vary the opacity and affect how much of each intent gets used. We were speculating about how we could incorporate this kind of feature into a future product.
Yes, I actually spend tens of thousands per year on corporate espionage, hoping to become a better art photographer and printmaker. The bug in your board room is just one of many. 
But seriously, to me, the hybrid perceptual mapping of 50% pm5 colorful mixed with 50% i1p (contrast 0, saturation 50, neutrality 75, smoothness 50) is currently the best mapping.
I also mix my camera input: the camera raw processor’s colors mixed with interpretations of those colors by profiles built with pm4, inCamera, and pm5. Interesting how different they all are, and not one of them is really acceptable to me on its own, but mixing them gives me a a great starting point.
On prints, the hybrid approach smooths out pm5 colorful’s oversaturated shadows and i1p’s slightly hyper contrast curve. But for my actual workflow, I’d like to avoid the extra processing steps of mixing. I’m not settled on what to use going forward. Still need to revisit Relative versus Perceptual, amongst other things.
With the pm5 profile editor I can gently nudge the middle of the tone curve a tiny bit up for some media and a tiny bit down for others to get an acceptably harmonious look across media using a single print file (avoiding the horror of media specific recipe image files at every print size for every image).
I’m not sure if there’s a way to accomplish this with the i1p software? I haven’t even played with the profile optimization step in i1p yet. Or maybe switching to Relative would satisfactorily address this. Lots more things to learn. Ideas?
Thanks.
- Brad