Re: Eye One Pro for monitor calibration? [was: Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView]
Re: Eye One Pro for monitor calibration? [was: Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView]
- Subject: Re: Eye One Pro for monitor calibration? [was: Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView]
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 07:59:23 -0700
- Thread-topic: Eye One Pro for monitor calibration? [was: Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView]
On 11/28/07 1:42 AM, "Martin Orpen" wrote:
>> In the cases you site, yes, it will be superior. But if you use it
>> on a wide
>> gamut display, you'll encounter errors in white point measurements
>> (I think
>> Karl Lang calculated a 500K 'error' with a Colorimeter on the 2690
>> over what
>> it should be, based on a $20K Spectroradiometer).
>
> Karl would need to convince me that that presents more of a problem
> than shadow mush for day to day retouching work on my wide gamut
> display.
Karl and Chris didn't present this as a problem, only a reality (the
difference). They didn't make a big thing out of it although we can allow
others who feel differently to do so.
> Well, if it's NOT a standard - why are these manufacturers falling
> over themselves to match it?
They are trying to get close or exceed it for one. The 2690 is 93% of Adobe
RGB (and again, as Chris says, whatever that means). The NEC LED unit is I
believe said to be 108%. They want to tell you its a wider gamut than sRGB
of which most displays roughly fall into. They don't know how else to tell
you, or give you some idea how much wider it is. So I'm hard pressed to call
it a standard.
> I'm working with imagery that falls outside of AdobeRGB - as is
> anybody who works with decent scanning equipment (or pro digital
> cameras).
Right. So the idea is to provide you, on images that do exceed sRGB, colors
you can now view. Of course, you have to then setup a soft proof for the
output device which can wildly differ from Adobe RGB (1998).
> I'd rather the monitor manufactures made an effort to match
> the blues that we get from scanned transparency rather than the weird
> green of AdobeRGB.
The have fixed sizes of color spaces to work with for one. Really wide gamut
displays can also present issues of granularity on images of low color
gamut. With wider the granularity in a color space, it bounces harder to see
subtle colors. This is why wide gamut displays that can't revert to sRGB
(current LCD technology doesn't allow this.) are not ideal for all work
(ideally you need two units and that's how I'm now working).
There are way, way more colors that can be defined in something like
ProPhoto RGB, let alone Adobe RGB (1998) than you could possibly output,
true. But we have to live with a disconnect between the simple shapes of RGB
working space and the vastly more complex shapes of output color spaces to
the point we're trying to fit round pegs in square holes. To do this, you
need a much larger square hole. Simple matrix profiles of RGB working spaces
when plotted 3 dimensionally illustrate that they reach their maximum
saturation at high luminance levels. The opposite is seen with print
(output) color spaces. Printers produce color by adding ink or some
colorant, working space profiles are based on building more saturation by
adding more light due to the differences in subtractive and additive color
models. To counter this, you need a really big RGB working space like
ProPhoto RGB again due to the simple size and to fit the round peg in the
bigger square hole. Their shapes are simple and predictable. Then there is
the issue of very dark colors of intense saturation which do occur in nature
and we can capture with many devices. Many of these colors fall outside
Adobe RGB (1998) and when you encode into such a space, you clip the colors
to the degree that smooth gradations become solid blobs in print, again due
to the dissimilar shapes and differences in how the two spaces relate to
luminance.
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
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