Apple

“Since XRite's linearization is chroma based you'll still want to have a UV filter for the best results”. Can you explain?

Their lineaization doesn't just linearize for density, it linearizes for neutrality. They way they have it implemented now optical brighteners can throw off the linearization with non UV devices. So, if you use XRite's linearization feature in either ColorBurst or MonacoProfiler you need to have a UV filter (at least when measuring papers with OBs).

When profiling with ProfileMakerPro a non-UV filtered device is preferable because GMB has smart, software based OB correction built in. That's not the case with the XRite based programs we are discussing here. However, I wouldn't conclude that GMB is better because of their OB correction. I'd like to see XRite implement software based OB correction but I'd like to see GMB use a linearization routine. The merger could be a good thing.

If I have an EyeOne Pro (not the UV cut) I could linearize with that and then use it to make the profiles, no?

You might get less than optimal results with OB papers.

The issue I had with Colorburst when I looked at it earlier this year (Feb) was that the built in Monaco profiling engine could not be used with the EyeOne and so while I could relinearize with the i1 their profiles would be “inconsistent” still because my i1 was not a UV cut device. Now with the ability to both linearize and profile with the i1 that issue should have gone away.

References:
	>Re: ColorBurst RIP update (From: Steve Kale <email@hidden>)