Re: Eizo Color Navigator
Re: Eizo Color Navigator
- Subject: Re: Eizo Color Navigator
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 16:59:46 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
Steve Upton wrote:
>Agreed, but the latter method is best to see if the monitor profile will reproduce color accurately on the screen and to test compliance with a reference data set (whether chosen to be in-gamut only or not). I suppose it is necessary if the native gamma of the display is kept constant in the profiling process. The profile will be required to see if the tone curve of the display is controllable...
>
>In summary, you really need both to effectively test a display's calibration & profiling.
Hi Steve and others.
I see the difference this way:
1) The method that starts with a list of RGB values is the one that only checks the *internal reliability* of the monitor profile itself -- i.e., how well the Lab values it determines internally correspond to the ones that are measured off the monitor by means of a colorimeter. By definition, this method does not create out-of-gamut reference values, because the Lab reference values are derived directly from assigning the monitor profile to the RGB numbers.
2) The method that starts with a list of Lab values checks the validity of the monitor profile against an *external reference* (e.g., compliance with a given proofing scenario). The reference Lab values could be out of the profile's gamut, in which case high DeltaE numbers would not be evidence of a "bad profile", necessarily, but only of the inability of the monitor to attain the aimpoints specified by the reference values.
Marco Ugolini
_______________________________________________
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