Re: pictogram's Incamera
Re: pictogram's Incamera
- Subject: Re: pictogram's Incamera
- From: "eugene appert" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 08:30:04 -0400
Title: Re: pictogram's Incamera
Thank
you for your detailed answer. This may simply be about loss of innocence.
Are you asking this question because it appears to you that
Incamera generated a profile without any need to read sample colors? Perhaps all
that happened in your case was that the default profile was applied to your
capture by the software, and, serendipitously, it happened to give you correct
values for the photo capture you made. It may just be a lucky
coincidence.
I
have been using profiles but never actually made one nor saw one made until
now. I have scanner and camera
profiles a technician has made for me using Monaco Proof software, (neither of
which come close to the accuracy of the incamera profile when re-examining the
target that produced it) The other profiles were made with an IT8 target which
admittedly has far more sample points but even the neutrals are never always on
the mark. Because of my experience with these other profiles coupled with my
understanding (crude at best) of Fraser, Murphy, Bunting I assumed that the
sample points of a target were used to deduce primaries from which a virtual
model was generated. Therefore the test of a profile would be to turn it back on
the target that generated it and measure the variances.
The
ease at which Incamera
produced perfect results before my eyes forced me to realise that I had overly
complicated the procedure. It was simply writing the known lab values beside the
control signals for the 24 sample points.
Now that I know that this is all it does I am surprised input-profiling
software isnt free at PC world.
Thanks
for your help.
Eugene
Appert
|
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden