• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
RE: Just how accurate we we need to be?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Just how accurate we we need to be?


  • Subject: RE: Just how accurate we we need to be?
  • From: Roger <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:07:53 -0500

Terry,

I agree in the proofing world, the numbers are everything. And the limit are
the way various instruments all illuminate the same sample more or less the
same and detect optical radiation more or less the same. As long as there is
a single "standard" to simulate, things are manageable, with good proofing
paper and good RIP software, under good lighting. Where I find numbers
become meaningless is relating colors across various proofing systems, who
don't all use the same colorants, don't all have the same optical properties
and therefore will not record the same on all instruments.

Best / Roger



 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

References: 
 >Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12 (From: Randy Zaucha <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Just how accurate we we need to be? (From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>)
 >RE: Just how accurate we we need to be? (From: Roger <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Just how accurate we we need to be? (From: Terence Wyse <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: CG243W problem with blacks? clipping?
  • Next by Date: RE: CG243W problem with blacks? clipping?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Just how accurate we we need to be?
  • Next by thread: Display profile/DTP94/OS 9.1
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread