While reading the "Calibration White Paper" PDF for the iColor Proof IP
software that drives the Quato LCD displays, I came across this statement
(on page 4 of the document, available at
<http://www.quato.de/english/products/whitepaper_quato_e.pdf>):
> "As the world¹s first dedicated display calibration software, iColor Proof IP
> allows you to save the profile in two different ways without the need of a
> recalibration. One can choose between a matrix- and a LUT-profile. As Adobe
> Photoshop is not able to work correctly with LUT-profiles it¹s not recommended
> to use this kind of profile in such a workflow. Instead a matrix-profile will
> do the job."
Now, I am no wiz when it comes to the inner arcana of color profiles, but
doesn't this sound a bit off? From what I know so far, (a) LUT-based monitor
profiles are supposed to be BETTER than matrix-based ones, given the
latter's inherently imprecise rendition of the display's behavior. And (b)
what is this about Photoshop not being "able to work correctly with
LUT-profiles"? Is this a load of bull or is there any truth to it?
--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
