Of colorful scepticism
Of colorful scepticism
- Subject: Of colorful scepticism
- From: "Michael S. Dodds" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 11:37:02 +0000
In the course of thinking about the subject I once did a little experiment.
I took a standard A4 NCS colour sample and within minutes I took some 20
shots on slightly different locations, using one and the same film, using
the best possible adjustments of the camera (a nikon F601). Then I scanned
the film, all images with the same adjustments.
-------
It seems to me
a camera is a capture device set apart from a scanner or "fixed" device.
Using a scanner involves using the identical light source every time.
You profile/calibrate it and it stays pretty good for awhile.
The same is true for the monitor. And, the printer for that matter.
--
However, when profiling an output device -
you must have profiles for all the media you will be using
as well as all the various inks you would be using.
Those are the variables you are profiling for.
--
You would have to admit - you would certainly re-profile
your scanner if changing lamps;
because you have introduced a variable.
--
Then, it goes to reason - that
you need to reprofile your camera for the various lighting situations
you encounter.
Because, you have introduced a variable.
You are NOT profiling the camera - more of a situation.
You wouldn't profile your camera in bright sunlight
take some pictures
than go into a dimly lit room take some pictures
and expect the photos
to be the same.
--
However - reprofile the camera for the dimly lit room, as well -
and then
there you go - color matching.
--
It is the same as the old color control patches ( well ?! )
you use them to discover your amount of color mismatching
from a variable (wavelength)
later in the processing cycle.
--
Something like that -- it seems
M.