• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'


  • Subject: Re: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'
  • From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:07:32 +0100

Screen profiles are important to me because I distribute camera profiles.

- I have found the optical Colorchecker test which Roger recommends to
be excellent, except I also use the Colorchecker SG charts which I
employ to make camera profiles. Files are displayed by Photoshop as
this is the environment which my work gets used in.

- When I get really desperate for certainty, I measure the physical
patches that annoy me, and write the values into the file - all
Colorcheckers are not alike.

- In all cases where I have had unsatisfying screen profiles, I have
later been able to achieve better profiles by changing equipment,
software, and applying sheer stubborness. I have been known to spend
an hour on the phone with the poor tech guys at a poor software maker.

- I check gray ramps, but do not consider that slight banding or
neutrality variations are a usage issue, for me, although I would
agree that they are globally indicative of profile quality.

- I usually call in a second pair of eyes to check over every
calibration with the sample chart under controlled light or daylight.
I found the other pair of eyes has more "immediate" perception of
colors, I need longer to decide.

- The "evaluations" included with some software have not been of much
use to me, although they can serve as problem indicators.

- it looks like people are starting to hoard Optix. I wonder whether
the same will be the case for Pulse.

Edmund

On 2/28/07, Andrew Rodney <email@hidden> wrote:

A spectrophotometer is not necessarily better (means more accurate or precise) then a colorimeter.

 Actually for handling a display, there are some who would say it's worse
due to its design! I've heard some say that for measuring darks on a
display, a good Colorimeter like the OPTIX is a much better option.
_______________________________________________
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


  • Follow-Ups:
    • RE: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'
      • From: "Bob Gardner" <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re[2]: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct' (From: Peter Karp <email@hidden>)
 >Monitor profiling - what is 'correct' (From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'
  • Next by Date: iCColor vs DTP70
  • Previous by thread: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'
  • Next by thread: RE: Monitor profiling - what is 'correct'
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread