Re: Spyder
Re: Spyder
- Subject: Re: Spyder
- From: neil snape <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 21:07:48 +0200
on 22/06/2003 20:41, rbooth wrote :
>
I was hoping for a little insight into what kinds of needs or demands the
>
OPTIcal might fill that the photocal doesn't. In my current state of
>
blissful ignorance I cant anticipate what I might need beyond an
>
accurately calibrated monitor, which I am assuming you DO get using
>
Spyder with Photocal. ( photocal does allow you an accurately calibrated
>
monitor right??)
>
I am using a G4 and OS9.2 with a Sony Trinitron at the moment but I
>
anticipate upgrading to a faster G4, new monitor and OS X within the
>
year.
I remember the advantages of Optical all the way back to version 2,0.
What it does so well , is to calibrate the monitor or rather help you to do
this. As with printers linearising or calibrating the device is the ultimate
prerequisite to making profiling creation work for you. I'll explain> when
you adjust your screen by calibration you are adjusting the gain (power) to
each color channel gun. When this lines up nicely to a desired correlated
color temperature ( white point preset) then the profile is more or less
only tweaking any irregularities in the grey and color channels and
describing the boundaries of the color gamut. Since the calibration
precludes large channel correction , the profile then has little
intervention in the channels allowing most of the levels intact. This
guarantees a calibration with almost or no banding and better grey balance
fidelity.
I would recommend Optical as an essential part to bona fide screen centric
workflow for any professional work.
Neil Snape
_______________________________________________
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.