Re: Subject: Re: Profiling software
Re: Subject: Re: Profiling software
- Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Profiling software
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:07:44 EDT
Hi TIm, glad to see you speaking up in this forum, it should add some
interesting information on Monaco's products.
In a message dated 6/14/01 8:57:46 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
I have seen many posts from Mr. Tobie on various
>
color management forums and have never seen him make it clear that
>
ColorVision compensates him for his continuous support on these forums
>
and
>
at trade shows.
Nor have I ever mentioned compensation I have received from Monaco, or any
other competing company. In this business the standard comment is that the
content of consulting contracts is not public information. But feel free to
comsider the content of my posts based on whatever assumptions you would care
to make, the statements should stand by themselves... and please note that
starting out a response with negative personal comments will not generally
win you points!
The most extensive testing I have seen can be found
>
at
>
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/5708-1.html. This test was done
>
in
>
by Bruce Fraser in May of 2000 and in it MonacoEZcolor produced far lower
>
average delta E scores (4 vs 10) than ProfilerRGB (then called MatchLock
>
Profiler).
I've always noted, where appropriate, that EZ Color's specialty is
colorimetric patch matching, which is very much what Bruce tested for with
this article; other articles and presentations using different standards came
up with different results. In fact at various points in time I have written
pieces noting EZ Color, WiziWYG, and Horses Profiler as the most effective
scanner based printer profiling solution. ProfilerRGB is more oriented
towards perceptual photo color processing than colorimetric patch matching,
and since that is what most users, especially photographic users, want it
bears some consideration. While I don't wish to put words in Bruce's mouth
(he's quite capable of speaking for himself) he has pointed out more than
once that the article you note is outdated, and the results no longer
necessarily valid. It was sufficiently long ago that ProfilerRGB was not even
listed in the article!
>
Is it coincidence that the one piece of equipment that ColorVision does
>
not
>
create profiles for is the one where you do not want to "damage" the file
>
by
>
"hammering" it with a profile? Scanner profiles are another piece of the
>
puzzle for a color managed workflow and have value as such. Are they the
>
answer for every workflow in every case? Of course not, but nothing ever
>
is.
True enough, nothing is ever the only answer. I have at least half a dozen
scanner profiling solutions on my computer, and don't find EZ Color to be the
one I would choose if I was buying scanner software by the component, but it
may well be that the beginning user looking fo a single source bundle will
find that EZ offers the compromise he or she is looking for.
My suspicions of scanner and digital camera profiling systems is longstanding
and far outreaches my testing for ColorVision... as several other vendors on
this list will tell you. <G>
>
>>If you buy the Colorvision bundle, wouldn't you then be looking
>
>>for some kind of IT8 calibration system, such as Silverfast's? Is it
>
that
>
>>Colorvision's monitor and printer profiling system is so much better
>
that
>
>>it is worth the expense to buy a separate scanner profiling system?
That depends on the users needs, and expectations in the various areas. I
would prioritize it this way:
Monitor profling is the first (and most vital) component, followed by output
profiling, and finally (if at all for a given workflow) source profiling.
The prime advantage of EZ Color is, and and always has been, its ability to
offer a bundle for all of these functions. They quality and flexibility of
the individual features has varied over time, and the current v2 bundle is
undoubtedly the best to date, but still compares with ups and downs against
other bundles and individual components. The decathelon athlete that wins the
gold medal for that series of events is never anyone who would be capable of
winning even a bronze medal in any of the ten events individually; its his
ability to do them all that counts.
>
>
MonacoEZcolor 2.0 offers monitor, scanner (reflective and transparency),
>
and
>
printer (RGB and CMYK) profiling; as well as the ability to edit printer
>
profiles for a retail price of $498 (including the MonacoSensor for monitor
>
calibration). There is no other package on the market that can offer this
>
level of quality and function at this price. That is my (biased) opinion.
>
Yes, if we phrase the question carefully to ask: "which single bundle is the
best affordable solution for profiling scanners (trans and reflect), monitors
(with puck) and RGB and CMYK printers (with limited Black and ink controls,
and modest editing, via scanner-based patch reading) all in one box", then EZ
Color is both the only contendor and the inevitable winner. Worded in other
ways, the results would vary.
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden