Re: Barco profiles
Re: Barco profiles
- Subject: Re: Barco profiles
- From: Richard C Busher Jr <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:05:11 -0800
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:45:07 +0000
Subject: Re: Barco profiles
From: Rob Griffith <email@hidden>
To: <email@hidden>
CC: <email@hidden>
Sorry to keep beating this issue to death, but I'm wondering about the
profiles that the Barco software builds. What is unclear is whether
or not
the software uses the measurements to build the profile or if it just
builds "generic" monitor profiles based on the gamma and whitepoint
you
select. I suspect the latter as the software allows you to export the
profile before any measurements are even made. The documentation is
not
clear about this either.
Someone told me a while back that nearly all monitor profiles are
similar
to one another (resembling sRGB?), so maybe this generic approach
works
(or is that totally bogus?). At some point I'm going to try building
monitor profiles with an iOne and ProfileMaker to see if there are any
appreciable differences, but I've got bigger fish to fry at present.
Eric Bullock
Hecht's/Strawbridge's Advertising
685 N. Glebe Road
Arlington, VA 22203
703.247.2391
email@hidden
Hi Eric
Barco measure each individual monitor in the factory with a high end
spectrophotometer. This data is then stored on a chip in the display
and
used to both to generate the profiles and to compensate for the
difference
between the sequel sensor that ships with the display and the factory
spectrophotometer.
The theory is that the calibration always returns the monitor to the
factory
state so you can generate the characterisation data only once. The
profiles
generated include any gamma and white point choices you have made. The
results are usually very accurate but I still prefer the Artisan.
Regards
Rob Griffith
--------------------------
The Colour Collective
49 Miranda Drive
Warwick
Warwickshire
CV34 6FE
UK
Phone: 01926 316447
Mobile: 07930 747838
Fax: 0871 4334763
Hi Eric, Rob, et. al.,
I have three Barco's in my shop and have been delighted with them for
years.
On several occasions I have done the following test: 1) Calibrate the
monitor using the built in sensor. 2) Open Photoshop and create a field
of an arbitrary Lab color. 3) Open the Barco Calibrator Talk
application, and use the sensor to measure the color, and calculate the
delta E difference between what is measured and what Photoshop has
created, i.e. the photoshop Lab values.
Results? In the most challenging situations I have rarely found a delta
E greater than 3. For almost all colors the delta E is usually less
than 1. If accurate, that is extraordinary!
Not having a Spectrolino to make independent measurements, I not
completely sure of these results. My conclusion, however, is that what
I see is what I've got.
That said, I too have been wrestling with the question of using the
monitor space as a working rgb space in stead of Adobe98, ColorMatch,
etc. My thinking is that although I am limiting myself to the colors
that the monitor is capable of reproducing, I am at least seeing those
colors as they are, and I do not have any colors in my file that are
outside that space, i.e. the color that I see may not be color that is
represented by the numbers.
For prepress work, which is what I do, I usually work in ColorMatch,
which is quite close to the Barco space. In PS4 I believe I was
actually working in the Barco space. At any rate, I am making editing
decisions based upon what I see, except for the highlights and shadows.
For those areas I make decisions based on the numbers.
After I make conversions to cmyk I then evaluate proofs under the light
box, and compare them to files on the monitor. Again, the only colors I
can see are the colors that the monitor can deliver. If my profiles for
my print vendor's proofing system are decent then the proofs are
satisfactory more often than not (85% or more on the first try.).
The cmyk offset printing space can produce some color that are outsite
the ColorMatch space. However, most cmyk colors fall well within that
space. (Dealing with the out-of-gamut colors is the essence of my
business.) Working with rgb colors outside of my monitor's space seems
to me to invite more problems, and uncertainties when it comes to cmyk
offset printing. I believe that I am better off knowing that the colors
I see on the monitor are the colors represented in the file, in rgb
space. I can then try to convert these colors to cmyk, and do the
tweaks that people pay me for to make the cmyk files come as close to
the rgb file as possible. If the rgb image is not a good representation
of the rgb file, then I've got problems.
Does any of this make any sense?
Cheers,
Dick Busher
Cosgrove Editions
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.