Re: Of colorful scepticism
Re: Of colorful scepticism
- Subject: Re: Of colorful scepticism
- From: Igor Asselbergs <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 13:54:03 +0200
Darrian Young wrote:
>
Once again I do not see how you reach this conclusion with the camera and
>
not with the scanner, and then with the printer. You cannot compare the
>
color in a scanner and the color in your head either, so it follows from the
>
first conclusion, that a scanner profile is also futile.
At the risk of being a nag:
While using a scanner you can easely compare the original scanned object
with the scanned image. You might even measure colour deviations exactly.
Therefore matching is possible: one can easely determine if the colours of
the original and the reproduction are the same.
While using a camera, what do you compare the captured image with?
See my point?
>
I have also had several cases where the results with a camera profile were a
>
bit to a lot better than without one. What better way to establish the
>
usefulness of an object than to use it, discuss it with other people, and
>
compare the results?
I'm not saying a camera profile is utterly useless (well,....not anymore
anyway :-))
I can very well imagine workflows where a camera profile might come handy.
Many of the postings provide ideas in that direction. Very good. Why not use
it if it works.
But I maintain that a camera profile will never work the same way a scanner
profile does. I still say a good camera profile should be something
fundamentally different from a scanner profile. So far all the postings
adressed problems of either technical or filosophical nature. What about
perception?
Call me opinionated, but I'm afraid I'll have to stick to my view untill
someone really does adress the problem of perception.
Igor Asselbergs