Re: Because we can...should we? (Was: Adobe RGB?)
Re: Because we can...should we? (Was: Adobe RGB?)
- Subject: Re: Because we can...should we? (Was: Adobe RGB?)
- From: Phil Green <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 23:35:34 +0000
- Organization: LCP
Tom Orino wrote:
>
I seem to recall seeing an ISO specification (or draft specification) for
>
soft proofing that calls for a recommended luminance of 100 cd/m2. Does
>
anyone know of this specification?
ISO 12646 DIS. It specifies a minimum of 80cd/m2, preferably at least
120 cd/m2, with an ambient illumination of no more than 32 lux. The
ambient level is important, as this influences the state of adaptation.
>
Does anyone follow it?
Unlikely, it's not published yet.
>
If that is the right number for soft proofing, should it not be the right
>
number for both CRTs and LCDs?
It's written for CRTs but is applicable to other display technologies.
>
Does the ability of LCDs to take us to much higher levels mean that we
>
should go there?
Higher levels are generally more comfortable to work with when judging
colour matches between images, although you may not necessarily want it
set so high for other kinds of work. For comparison, the recommended
luminance of the surface of a transparency viewer is 1270cd/m2.
--
Phil Green
Colour Imaging Group
LCP
Elephant and Castle, London SE1 6SB
Tel: +44 020 7514 6759 Fax: +44 020 7514 6772
http://www.digitalcolour.org
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.