Re: Advice regarding...
Re: Advice regarding...
- Subject: Re: Advice regarding...
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:10:43 -0700
- Thread-topic: Advice regarding...
Title: Re: Advice regarding...
On 1/6/06 1:19 PM, "Louis Dery" wrote:
At the time you’ve tested our software, the version was 1.2.8 and it was just released for tester. This was the same version sent to the Profiling Review made by Mr. Sharma.
If you ’ve read the profiling review, you will see the comparison with other profilers.
First, it would have been a good idea in the original post to have mentioned this is how you based “the best”. 2nd, I’ve seen the report. Third, based on the version of the software I saw back then, I would NOT have ranked it as such. At least based on the output from it versus a few other packages I tested.
It’s quite possible that based on some metric, your product produced the “best colorimetric” values (which should be stated). But it didn’t by a long shot produce the best visual output IMHO. That was several years ago if memory serves me. The product might have improved tremendously since then. I know several of the other major profiling packages (the ones that ARE mentioned quite a bit here) have also improved.
When I say it is better, it is because existing users and testers reported it to us.
OK, I'll buy that. But “better” on its own terms is pretty ambiguous. Had to call you on that one!
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
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