Re: Colorvision/Photocal Syder
Re: Colorvision/Photocal Syder
- Subject: Re: Colorvision/Photocal Syder
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:37:08 -0600
on 5/5/01 5:41 AM, Peter Calvin at email@hidden wrote:
>
started with the canned Viewsonic profile, and also tried using a generic
>
one, as starting points and the profiles are terrible, the screen flat, off
>
color, and washed out. I have built an Adobe Gamma profile that I update
>
every couple of weeks that is far, far, far closer to the output I am
>
getting than with Photocal.
What do you mean you started with a canned profile? You don't do that with
PhotoCal, it creates it's own calibration and profile from scratch. You also
do NOT want Gamma running. Use only one calibration product.
>
Images scanned with the Photocal
>
profile are oversaturated and contrastly when viewed with a more neutral
>
profile.
I'm confused again. What do you mean images scanned with the PhotoCal
profile? The display profile is only used for preview purposes. It isn't
used as a source (scanner) or destination (working) space. It's quite
possible you have a scanner that has no clue about previewing color as
Photoshop does. That would explain a mismatching of preview in your scanning
application and Photoshop. That's not the fault of PhotoCal, the profile or
anything but the scanning software. The preview in Photoshop is correct. IF
the images look poor there and good in the scanning app, the scanning app is
fooling you visually because it has no idea how to do anything other than
send raw monitor RGB to the screen. That's not how PS works.
>
Is it a "Viewsonic Thing"?
Nope. It runs just fine on two Viewsonic displays I own.
Andrew Rodney