Re: G7 press calibration, best press conditions or average?
Re: G7 press calibration, best press conditions or average?
- Subject: Re: G7 press calibration, best press conditions or average?
- From: Steve Miller <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:28:46 -0500
- Thread-topic: G7 press calibration, best press conditions or average?
The answers to these questions are all in the G7 how-to documentation.
> How does maintaining specific SIDs and specific TVIs NOT achieve
> stability?
>
> How is maintaining SIDs and TVIs more effort that G7 Lab measurements?
>
> The bet that G7 is *better* than densitometric-based method is, um,
> somewhat deceptively attractive. If we were to use real money, what
> would the ground rules be?
>
> Since I don't believe that we are ever going to agree on the rules
> anyhow, I'll propose a simple one, such as:
>
> 1. The one and only rule: The press is to be in a repeatable state.
>
> How is it that one could prove that G7 is better at bringing a press
> to this state? This would only be a matter of quibbling over the
> accuracy of Lab vs. density values. They are both accurate
> measurements, are they not? And, since when does a press not move
> about during a run? (I ask this in advance of the inevitable
> disagreement over the acceptable range of the measurements).
>
> Don't you suspect that a press operator can use a densitometer to
> bring a press to its target in an acceptable manner?
>
>
> Henry Davis
>
>
_______________________________________________
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