Re: Barco vs Eizo
Re: Barco vs Eizo
- Subject: Re: Barco vs Eizo
- From: Roberto Michelena <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:11:34 -0500
> We don't buy both cars and drive them until
> the tank is dry to see which one goes farther. We look at the published
> numbers. So where are there some stats that can be used to compare
> instruments? And we should be able to compare across technology types. For
> cars, one car may have a V-6 engine and one may have a rotary engine and one
> may have batteries, but we can still compare acceleration and gas mileage
> for all. So, too, we should be able to compare monitor
> calibration/profiling performance regardless of or across underlying
> technology types(colorimeter or spectro).
>
> Am I being ridiculous or just plain crazy? :-)
Michael,
You hit the nail in the head; but the really big difference is the
size of the audience a car comparison or "shootout" might have vs the
one for a monitor profiling shootout.
Some years ago The Seybold Report was the landmark for such analytical
feats; but now it's just the shadow of its former self.
Some years ago I also did those kind of comparisons myself; but later
realized I was spending money just to give myself the satisfaction of
pure knowledge, without a revenue stream from it. Customers never
appreciated this 'extra mile' thing, at least not with their wallets.
So I had to cut it off, stop being a playful kid and focus on
business. Not that I wouldn't do it again if I knew I could spare that
money.
At some point MacWorld or MacUser did this kind of comparisons; I
believe it was Bruce Fraser who did it for MacWorld; I specially
recall some comparison of Barco vs LaCie using Minolta
spectroradiometers. But still, it only scratched the surface, and now
it's totally obsolete.
The Western Michigan University (WMU - Abhay Sharma) is also doing
profiling shootouts, and their technique is being refined every time
(the first one was very crude). But monitor profiling/calibration is
kind of a secondary thing in those venues, Inkjet Proofing being the
star. Also, instruments are not being evaluated, only profiling
packages.
IPA (US) is also doing proofing shootouts, as is the ECI together with
Bvdm and the University of Wuppertal in something known as the
"Digital Proofing Forum", but in both cases the focus is solely on
inkjet proofing.
In the case of WMU, IPA and Digital Proofing Forum, the reports cost
money, and it's not loose change.Of course they have to cover the
expenses, and manufacturers shouldn't be the ones to do so because the
report has to mantain it's total independence, but unfortunately this
severely restricts the access to the results.
If you want to send me an Eizo and some colorimeters and spectros,
plus a spectroradiometer to verify, I'll do it for you, no charge :)
-- Roberto Michelena
Infinitek
Lima, Peru
_______________________________________________
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>) |