• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: 2 questions about monitors
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2 questions about monitors


  • Subject: Re: 2 questions about monitors
  • From: "Richard Frederickson [Contr]" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:49:54 -0400

Title: Re: 2 questions about monitors
I may have an answer to one of your questions.

We use a 5000 K viewing booth next to our scanning workstation. The best "match" visually for us is 5500 K on our Apple Cinema Display (LCD). I'm told this is common and ok to do. The important thing is that a white sheet of paper in the booth should look like the "white" on your screen. This should then show you an image on your screen that will visually match the final printed piece in your booth (the objective of soft proofing).

I hope your booth is dimmable. The other critical factor in viewing conditions is that the luminance of each match each other (booth and monitor, that is).

Sincerely,
Richard

Richard Frederickson [Contractor]
Senior Technical Specialist
Scientific Publications, Graphics & Media (SPGM)
SAIC-Frederick, Inc.
National Cancer Institute at Frederick
Frederick, MD  21702-1201
(301) 846-1546

Visit us at http://web.ncifcrf.gov/spgm


Hi,

I have two questions about monitors - the first one pretty basic, I have to admit.

First one: Comparing to a printed picture on a 5000K booth, why the best match is achieved with the monitor set up at 6500K? Theoretically I don't have to mantain the same color temperature in both?

Second one: Where I find more information about the beforementioned L* monitor calibration?

Thanks in advance,

Alex Villegas
Coordenador Técnico Pré-Produção
Metromedia Technologies
5511 4689.7759 / 5511 4689.7760
email@hidden
On Sep 16, 2005, at 9:46 PM, Marco Ugolini wrote:
In a message dated Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:39:35, Roger Breton wrote:
There is also an L* opto-electronics function that is starting to
pick momentum among color management circles but you certainly don't go
wrong with 2.2.

I strongly and enthusiastically vouch for the use of L* in monitor
calibration and profiling. I am getting outstanding profiles using L*: long,
even grayscale gradations with neglectable color seepage, very good detail
in shadows and highlights, excellent neutrality.

Kudos to Karl Koch for his very good work.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA


 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>40gmail.com

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:
>40ncifcrf.gov

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: gamma 1.8 or 2.2 (From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>)
 >2 questions about monitors (From: Alex Villegas <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Microsoft's color-management claims
  • Next by Date: Re: moderately priced displays??
  • Previous by thread: Re: 2 questions about monitors
  • Next by thread: gamma 1.8 or 2.2
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread