Re: notches on the L * axis
Re: notches on the L * axis
- Subject: Re: notches on the L * axis
- From: "eugene appert" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 20:30:38 -0500
I think we all tend to fixate a bit too much on the numbers and whether they have some "special meaning".
Roy Harrignton
I will try and keep the idea of fixating on numbers close to my thoughts while writing this because I really belive it's the most important thing that needs to be said.
I recognize myself here, that is, at least since the computer replaced the dark room. My first lesson in the digital world was that file data expressed as either % or levels represented nothing more than a sequence of potential distinctions, and that only Lab values, dervived from the original CIE standard observer could define and encode "unambiguously" colour as it is perceived by human eye. That revelation coupled with economical factors that prevented me from owning an $8000.00 monitor created a depedancy if not "fixation" on the L* numbers. They became my seeing eye dog.
"When it comes to the output of "real" data, there are further questions:
what will be sent to the device when you define e.g. 50% in your vector
program 49.8, 50.0 or 50.2? Will your RIP treat vector- and bitmap data
in the same way? Do you use JPEG compression? Are there entities in your
workflow that add noise to the data to hide banding artifacts
graciously? Will that noise be added before or after the compression?
What interpolation methods will be used to scale the data to the output
resolution? Are there sharpening filters in the processing chain?"
Klaus Karcher
I am an artist, and love to read philosophy, and have to confess that I think the events of 1919 with respect to the mapping of the human perceptual response to light was a major breakthough for modern science. Though I have never actually studied the history of science I believe that this was possibly the very first time that empirical science ventured into human experience. Before the CIE exprerments of 1919, modern science was not able to prove the existence of subjective or sensoriel experience. The standard observer was a big deal, it was the bridge between subject reality and rationl systems.
So a few thousand human guinea pigs said "yes" and "no" to the question "are the samples identical" ? IE. DISTINCTIONS!! What resulted was the construction of the CIE colorimetric model the "standard observer" which encoded the human perceptual response to colour.
Apparently if I am understanding you , there is far too much burocracy and adminstration to ever connect such a model to real world practical every-day results.
So . the formula says that L* = the anti log Y of of XYZ . Which would aparently tie L* to real world concrete reflective densities is out the window because Photoshop rounds off numbers and if jpeg compression is used who knows where values will be transcribed.
My question is . is there a science or are we just playing kitchen bridge. ?
Eugene Appert
_______________________________________________
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