Re: Of colorful scepticism
Re: Of colorful scepticism
- Subject: Re: Of colorful scepticism
- From: Darrian Young <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 13:00:08 +0200
Igor Asselbergs wrote:
>
I never had a serious traffic accident, so I take it you're not refering
>
to me.
I hope it is not because you also deny the existence of movement... You know
the chariot story - to get from A to B you have to go halfway, but to get
halfway you also half to go halfway of the halfway and so on... So you never
really move :-).
>
>
This is not semantics or filosophy. I'm talking facts.
Please don't draw a line between philosophy and facts. They are perfectly
compatible.
>
>
Point being: a camera profile will have to deal with problem nr 1, a
>
scanner profile will have to deal with problem nr. 2. Therefore: a
>
camera profile should be something fundamentally different from a
>
scanner profile. Which it is not in current colour management.
>
>
So I maintain: since we cannot directly compare a colour in our head
>
with a colour in a camera, a camera profile is more or less futile.
>
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.
As Mr. Bingham wrote:
"Actually I think the definitive answer on camera profiling is far more
easily determined... The time I spend fooling around trying to match
client product colors has rapidly (ok 8 years ain't exactly rapid) been
reduced from an average of 20-30 minutes per shot down to less than 1
minute each."
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?
Regards.
--
Darrian Young
Microgestio Valencia