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: Dan Reid <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 11:46:09 -0700
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 16:40:22 -0500, Tom Orino <email@hidden> 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: Dispays for color proofing - Characteristics and viewing
conditions (still in draft stage)
ISO 3664:2000 Viewing conditions - Graphic technology and photography
>
Does anyone follow it?
ISO 12646 is not ratified so not much to follow. I have been advocating the
higher luminance levels for a long time for monitor to print comparison. ISO
3664 references ISO 12646 (draft) for monitor calibration setup.
>
If that is the right number for soft proofing, should it not be the right
>
number for both CRTs and LCDs?
My opinion is yes.
>
Does the ability of LCDs to take us to much higher levels mean that we
>
should go there?
Not if CRTs are also being used in the same work group.
The higher the display's luminance level the less compensation is required
at the booth.
--
Dan B. Reid
RENAISSANCE PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGING
Color Imaging Solutions Provider
http://www.rpimaging.com | email@hidden
Toll Free: (866) RGB-CMYK [ 866-742-2695 ]
Local: (505) 471-4126
_______________________________________________
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.