RE: Barco vs Eizo
RE: Barco vs Eizo
- Subject: RE: Barco vs Eizo
- From: "Michael Fox Photography News Account" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:27:24 -0700
- Organization: Michael Fox Photography
Probably true for the CS-100.
I was referring to the correction factor for the other instruments. The
factor only works if the device being corrected doesn't vary from the way it
performed when the correction factor was determined.
------------
Michael Fox Photography - Fine Art Nature Photography
http://www.michaelfoxphoto.com
> > I guess that's true enough if repeatability is high, i.e. the instrument
> > doesn't drift. But I've read that at least one popular spectro, the
> eyeOne
> > Pro, does have quite a bit of drift, especially when measuring emissive
> > values in the darker end of the range. Evidently, the instrument will
> drift
> > enough during the time you are calibrating and profiling the monitor
> that
> > the resulting shadow values can be significantly off, compared to the
> > results from other devices.
> >
> > I don't have the instruments to measure such things but perhaps someone
> here
> > could comment on this?
>
> I have not made longitudinal study of the stability of my regular emissive
> instruments including EyeOnePro and Optix and DTP92s and Spyder2 and
> Spectrocam. But I trust that I won't have to revisit my CS-100 for drift
> too
> often.
>
> Roger Breton | Laval, Canada | email@hidden
> http://pages.infinit.net/graxx
>
>
_______________________________________________
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