Re: IdeaAlliance Dataset question (Roger Breton)
Re: IdeaAlliance Dataset question (Roger Breton)
- Subject: Re: IdeaAlliance Dataset question (Roger Breton)
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:46:20 -0400
Hi Phil,
> Am I right that the "No.5" Data set is for conventional SWOP papers (slightly
> yellowish??) and "No.3" is for higher quality brighter (a* 0, b*0) papers?
The way I see it, looking at the data, the #5 data has even been made
"yellower" than the actual substrate it represents, Monterrey Gloss. I've
measured that grade countless times with various techniques and backing and
instruments but I never get a b* = +4 as they report in their dataset. I get
betwee 3 and 3.4 but not 4.
As for the #3 paper, it's unclear to me why they purposely zeroed out the a*
and b* values when the actual substrate, StoraEnso FortuneGloss, is far from
neutral. I've complained about this to IDEAlliance arguing that it will
screw up the absolute colorimetry big time but no one, so far, has bothered
replying my emails.
> The later often being used on publication covers, etc.
Right on both counts.
> Also ISO 2846-1 inkset used.
True.
> Any info about the print conditions?
We've been told that this is the results of three separate press runs at
three web offset plants, Quad, RIT and Brown. I'd like to know more about
how the measurements were arrived at but I guess we'll have to wait for some
Technical Reports to be published under the auspices of CGATS to learn the
full story.
> Phil Cruse
Roger Breton | Laval, Canada | email@hidden
http://pages.infinit.net/graxx
_______________________________________________
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