Re: Evaluating Eye-One Photo
Re: Evaluating Eye-One Photo
- Subject: Re: Evaluating Eye-One Photo
- From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:08:53 +0200
Stephen,
Most other participants on the list have more knowlege than me, but
they are generally more interested in proofing and printing on a press
than in fine art so I'll venture some comments. There is a list on
Yahoo somewhere where the fine art guys congregate (wide format
printing ?).
If you do fine art, absolute colorimetric accuracy does not matter as
much as in industrial printing because you have no contractual spot
colors for products (Coca-Cola-Red). Smoothness does matter. Also, I
don't think it's at all obvious that software which does well in RGB
mode does well in CMYK and vice-versa. In fact I sometimes wonder if
profiling software isn't generally much better optimised for CMYK
because it all started in the printing industry.
I think you should have a look at some profiles made with the Monaco
(Xrite) engine, they are different-smoother- than the PMP profiles.
Actually, if you can send me a measurement file from the GMB stuff,
eg. exported as a CGATs file, I think I can run it through Monaco
Profiler and you can compare the results.
Re the UV cut-out, my position for fine-art printing is just say no:
You are making prints, and the viewer will see the effects of the UV
if his viewing light contains UV (and it probably does). The UV-cut
is, I believe, useful for proofing.
There is space for endless experimentation in printing and profiling.
A RIP should provide you with plenty of additional tweaks, but these
really only come into play if you have paid for the full CMYK option
of your profiling software.
Gutenprint (open source) has an RGB driver and a CMYK driver which
you should have a look at, you may find it worth playing with.
Last, not least, if you want to run the big Atkinson targets through
my DTP-70, please contact me.
Edmund
On 7/13/06, Graeme Gill <email@hidden> wrote:
Roger Breton wrote:
> The Optix has all my respects but I would give you a second chance to
> evaluate the EyeOnePro for monitor calibration. I can remember having lot's
> of trouble just getting my system together so that I would not get corrupted
> calibration, regardless of the instrument I would use. So, make sure your
> system is in good order before you try whichever instrument you elect to
> buy. Because you could still be disapointed.
Yes the DTP94 (AKA Optix) seems to be a pretty solid, repeatable
instrument. It's a tad slow on the darker CRT's I find though,
probably the penalty paid for accuracy. I find that the
Spectrolino is noticeably faster. Of course I think I'm noticing
it because I'm generally doing at least a few hundred readings
to calibrate, and more to profile, but this again is a precision/speed
tradeoff.
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