Re: Barco vs Eizo
Re: Barco vs Eizo
- Subject: Re: Barco vs Eizo
- From: <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:22:26 -0400
Michael,
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 09:34:11 -0700
"Michael Fox Photography News Account"
<email@hidden> wrote:
Pascal,
I too would like to see serious data. Without such
measurements, we're all
at the mercy of each vendor's marketing claims that this
or that instrument
is better than the other one. Furthermore, we should
have a way to directly
compare a colorimeter to a spectro as least as far as
monitor calibration
and profiling results are concerned.
Very true. When combined with the various software with
their various configuration settings, comparison consumes
LOTS of time and becomes near impossible for anyone with
normal budgets. This is why people tend to stick to what
works for them.
Yes, they are different technologies
but, in the end, what matters is the quality of the
resulting measurement.
To which I would add: ...and the "looks"!
Regards,
Danny
email@hidden
www.BabelColor.com
Michael
------------
Michael Fox Photography - Fine Art Nature Photography
http://www.michaelfoxphoto.com
-----Original Message-----
Michael,
I would like to see serious data validating this claim
of
drift. This "conclusion" could happened if:
Danny Pascale
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
| References: | |
| | >RE: Barco vs Eizo (From: "Michael Fox Photography News Account" <email@hidden>) |