Re: Can DeviceLink conversions be better?
Re: Can DeviceLink conversions be better?
- Subject: Re: Can DeviceLink conversions be better?
- From: Klaus Karcher <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 10:19:42 +0200
Marco Ugolini wrote:
Klaus, I know all this, and you may know that I know, if you have followed
my contributions to this forum over what are now several years. I fail to
see what you're trying to instruct me about that I am not already aware of.
Well -- it's a mailing list and not everyone is at your standard of
knowledge. I decided to reply to your posting as it happened to be the
most suitable link to get across what I had to get off my chest in this
context.
[...]
I fail to see the relevance of this to my comment on Rolf's device link
test. What I can see on my monitor looks better in the image converted with
the device link profile. My comment was limited to just that, and obviously
didn't claim to apply to that which my monitor in not capable of displaying.
This does not make much sense to me: when one aims to prove the
capabilities of optimized device links for a certain device, one should
use that device or at least one that is capable to represent the whole
gamut of that device smoothly and clipping-free IMHO -- otherwise the
results are less conclusive.
Klaus
_______________________________________________
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