Andrew,
First, when I mentionned "best", it is based on "numbers" and feedback from users AND also, objective comparison with other profiles made with same color data. It is also based on the ability to perform not only for desktop inkjet or camera, but also for high end color printing process like offset, flexo, web, giclee, etc.
My initial post was only to specify that there is not only two players in the ICC profiling market, there are other solutions ou there. That’s it.
Louis Dery TGLC inc. www.tglc.com
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
|