Re: differences between colorimeter & spectrophotometer
Re: differences between colorimeter & spectrophotometer
- Subject: Re: differences between colorimeter & spectrophotometer
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 18:04:01 EDT
In a message dated 10/3/01 3:59:52 PM, email@hidden writes:
>
Sorry to snip here, but C. David's comment is/was:
>
>
>A good comparison is Gretag Macbeth's EyeOne and ColorVision's Spyder.
>
The
>
Spyder is an inexpensive, durable, emissive only colorimeter. It does not
>
require special handling or recalibration and costs less than half the
>
price of the EyeOne emissive only model. The monitor only EyeOne is an
>
emissive only Spectro and needs to be treated properly, and sent back to
>
the factory every year for recalibration and adjustment.
>
>
I disagree. We have an EyeOne, which is essentially the same device as
>
the
>
Spectrolino (of which, we have many.) The only devices that have required
>
"special handling or recalibration" have been the ones that I've punted
>
a
>
few yards. I do not have ColorVision's Spyder, but do have other (older)
>
colorimeters. I have not had the same luck with those devices.
>
>
Also, be aware that a device that uses a more complex set of filters, or
>
a
>
diffraction grater (such as the EyeOne) may be more appropriate for certain
>
markets, such as printing inks, paints, plastics, or textiles, that may
>
utilize more than typical additive or subtractive colors.
Not snipping, these are all good points. I have punted Spyders without any
damage, its not at all atypical to drop, step on and generally abuse a device
that is lugged around and plugged into many monitors. I prefer to leave my
spectros in a safer environment, and not try to use them for both functions.
In terms of spectros and surface reading... I'd agree, and would even
recommend a spherical spectro for some of those materials. However monitor
calibration does not involve any such materials...
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden