Re: Eye-One Diagnostics
Re: Eye-One Diagnostics
- Subject: Re: Eye-One Diagnostics
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:02:56 +0100
(Hopefully, this re-posting will only appear once. The first attempt
bounced.)
Ray wrote:
>If an instrument does not pass diagnostics, it should not be used
until it does
Right, if the instrument fails diagnostics, flip it into a shipping box
for service.
>Now on to the FUD about the Digital Swatchbook
I don't know what FUD stands for in US slang acronymics, honest -:).
>I did not search the archives
The co-ordinate was 1 Feb 2001. The topic was intra-instrument and
inter-instrument tolerances. The reference was a TARGA comparison, and
a private comparison. The TARGA comparison found up to dE 6, and the
private comparison up to dE 3.5 between instruments. The Digital
Swatchbook had its own opinion of yellows.
Intra-instrument and inter-interstrument tolerances were also discussed
within the ECI at the time. Proof validation with the FOGRA Media Wedge
is affected by instrument-related issues and rendering intent-related
issues, both of which are additional to other process tolerances. This
has an impact on the climate of discussion. Open systems, closed minds,
so to speak.
>or you confirm with an alternate piece of software that you have
exposed a software problem
An attempt was made to figure it out at one point. It ended with a note
dropped in FOGRAs broad lap. Instrument tolerances are a fact of life
and simply have to be factored into any overall concept of process
tolerances.
>Frankly it is rare that a quality instrument . . . is the real problem
in getting good color
>management results
Right, good results assume acquaintence with calibration,
characterization (including measurement) and conversion. But there has
been an agressive advertising angle on all sides in color management
marketing. This angle has convinced the loose image users, but it is a
narrow one which does not sit well with the full page users.
>When reading thinner materials, for color management purposes it is
>often desirable to measure against white to minimize unwanted
background
>absorption in light colors . . .
>This effect can be minimized by using the optional raised white backer.
The initial thread for this discussion was "Black and white in color"
in Volume 1 of the Digest. The raised white backer solution was posted
many times on this and other lists. But in a sense the Digital
Swatchbook, and the older DTP 22 OEM product, are water under the
bridge.
When Heidelberg decided that the desktop was too confused and too
undisciplined to work effectively with color management, X-Rite retired
from the color management market. I'm curious if this is intended to be
a permanent condition?
Thanks,
Henrik
_______________________________________________
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.