Re: Rel vs Abs proofs
Re: Rel vs Abs proofs
- Subject: Re: Rel vs Abs proofs
- From: Terry Wyse <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:44:56 -0400
On Oct 14, 2006, at 8:04 AM, Mike Eddington wrote: >Take a look at the Media White Point of the #3 dataset. That is supposed to
represent StoraEnso FortuneGloss. I don't know who tampered with these
numbers but the Media White Point in that data set is plain wrong. I sent a
letter to Diane Kennedy at IDEAlliance about it three weeka ago and she has
not responded yet. Same thing with the #5 data set. Take a look at the media
White point: it exagerates the white point of the Monterrey Gloss! Somebody
straighten those people.> I've no experience with either of these stocks. I see SWOP coated 3 white point = 92.50 0.00 0.00, and SWOP coated5 = 90.06 -0.01 4.14. From your experience, what should thesee numbers be?
I've been looking into this myself and there seems to be some discrepancy between the paper white LAB in the new SWOP2006 data sets vs. the published values in ISO 12747-2:2004. The SWOP2006 values are as Mike reports. The ISO values are:
Paper Type 3: L*92 a*0 b*+5 Paper Type 5: L*90 a*0 b*+9 (These are the values reported as measured on white backing per CGATS.5. Interestingly, the "official" values measured on black backing show a 2-5 drop in L* but a DECREASE in the b* component (less yellow) by 2-3).
In any case, it seems that the paper values contained in the SWOP2006 data set does not agree with the ISO values for the same paper type.
Regards, Terry
_____________________________ WyseConsul Color Management Consulting G7 Certified Expert 704.843.0858
|
_______________________________________________
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