Re: which makes better monitor profiles?
Re: which makes better monitor profiles?
- Subject: Re: which makes better monitor profiles?
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 16:26:47 EST
In a message dated 2/14/02 3:35:00 PM, email@hidden writes:
>
Your post leads me to believe that OptiCAL builds a better profile than
>
>
PhotoCAL. True? You were really addressing the difference between the
>
>
ColorVision product and a competitor so I'm putting words in your mouth
>
here
>
>
so could you clarify the difference between PhotoCAL and OptiCAL? Even
>
the
>
>
ColorVision web site is pretty fuzzy on the differences between the two
>
>
packages. Have you found any difference between a PhotoCAL profile and
>
a
>
>
OptiCAL profile?
In previous version if PhotoCAL and OptiCAL there was a difference in how the
two versions read colors (PhotoCAL read R, G, & B seperately, while OptiCAL
read R=G=B grays) so there was a difference in the profiles they created.
With the LCD/CRT versions of the software, this has changes, since LCDs make
different demands. OptiCAL still offers advanced controls, larger numbers of
white point and gamma settings etc... but now reads color ramps the same way
PhotoCAL does. The native white point setting in OptiCAL would be the feature
that would produce a difference in the current version. But for most monitors
the two programs will currently build very similar profiles, using a same
settings. Its the ability to sculpt custom targets, and define your own
settings that sets OptiCAL apart.
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
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.