RE: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 183
RE: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 183
- Subject: RE: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 183
- From: "Mark Rice" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 15:48:04 -0400
Marco - that's an interesting point of view, but I find it hard to verify
objectively.
How do you detect banding with an instrument or numbers? Can you do it? I
can spot it visually in half a second.
Do you use an instrument every time you want to detect consistency? You
could, but I can lay out 100 test images and spot the inconsistent one in a
second.
If I told you that my second marriage is better than my first, would you
find that very vague? Would you be able to detect it with some kind of
instrument?
I specified in detail what "better results" meant - perhaps you didn't see
that part <g>
I am really not promoting this as a generalized profiling package - it is a
package for a particular RIP application. My major point is that using a
RIP, and then generating ICC profiles with a third party application, is
more INCONSISTENT than using the profile generator built into the RIP
package.
Best regards,
Mark
>I'm curious about how you consider the results of this profiling
>package better than others? Objective and/or subjective?
>Randy's point is well-taken. I find it next to useless when I hear opinions
that do not state some kind of objectively verifiable fact.
>"Better results" is a very vague statement. Without hearing *what* is
better and how other individuals can verify that for themselves, I am not
>at all made eager to look into what this other profiling package can do for
me.
>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