Re: Media Testing for maclife.de (was: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 290)
Re: Media Testing for maclife.de (was: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 290)
- Subject: Re: Media Testing for maclife.de (was: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 290)
- From: Uli Zappe <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:25:53 +0200
Hi Bob,
I got numbers, and I reported them. It's called science.
Ah! Its a first step along the science road. The next, and vital,
step is getting someone else to repeat the experiments and get the
same numbers. Only then can we assume the techniques and
measurements are OK, and the facts are probably true. Then comes
finding explanations for the facts; then more experiments to test
the explanations. And so on.
No disagreement here at all.
Everything anyone can do at a single moment in time is only a step
into a direction. Though it's only a step, it's still one of the atoms
the process is made of.
As far as monitor profiling is concerned, I already cross-checked my
results with those of a research project of a German university.
I had no such chance for camera profiling so far, although I would
certainly welcome it.
I understand that it is unsatisfactory for many readers on this list
that they cannot read the original review due to the language barrier.
Though I posted my rough English summary with the best intentions to
this list, due to the heated debate, it has become more of a "teaser"
than the synopsis it was supposed to be. I realize it would be the
best solution to offer a complete translation of the review, but
unfortunately, as of here and now, I simply don't have the resources
to do this. However, I will try and come up with a "smaller" solution
- see my next post.
You know, Adobe isn't the hub of the universe although some people
here certainly behave as if it was.
If you had just presented your results for discussion in an unbiased
manner, and not make derogatory remarks about Adobe, this thread
would have ceased a week or more ago.
But in a way, that's exactly my point: was is it about Adobe that
makes it so important that one seemingly derogatory remark generates
one week of heated discussion?
Anyway, just to get the sequence clear:
If you re-read my original review summary from September 1st, you will
not find any "derogatory" remarks about Adobe. (Yes, it says Adobe's
default profiles were worse than those of Aperture, but this was
simply my measurement results.)
One of the first reactions to this review was a remark of Andrew along
the lines that nobody needs ICC camera profiles, anyway.
Obviously, this is sounding strange for someone who just spent weeks
reviewing ICC camera profiles with good results, so I asked for
reasons and was told that this is the stance of "smart Adobe
engineers" (Andrew's words). I have to admit that I strongly dislike
this kind of argumentation that to me has the abstract form of "There
is someone superior who disagrees, therefore you are wrong, period."
So I reacted with a possibly too emotional remark, saying in effect
that I doubted the alleged superiority of Adobe engineers. If Andrew
had mentioned the pope instead of Adobe engineers, I would have
reacted exactly the same.
However, since it wasn't the pope but Adobe, I was criticized for what
I said. *Only in reaction to this* I made it clear that I have my
personal gripes about Adobe and therefore was possibly too emotional
when rejecting this kind of "authority" argument. I *never* mentioned
my feelings towards Adobe in the technical discussion; I *only*
mentioned them in the *social* context of explaining why I rejected
engineers from Adobe as some kind of authority. And again, I also
would have rejected the pope, it's just that Andrew's request to
accept some authority sounded especially strange to me in the case of
Adobe.
I dearly hope this settles this thing once and for all.
Why not take the method that you claim is superior, use it in one of
the raw programs that accept it, and help make those programs into
the 'must have' programs of the future. Berating Adobe, a company
you dislike, for not doing what you want in its current programs is
fairly pointless, it seems to me.
Pointing out missing features in specific software products is a
completely normal part of a review, and constitutes the journalistic
way of contributing to a future when the 'must have' programs will be
the right ones. :-)
Bye
Uli
________________________________________________________
Uli Zappe, Solmsstraße 5, D-65189 Wiesbaden, Germany
http://www.ritual.org
Fon: +49-700-ULIZAPPE
Fax: +49-700-ZAPPEFAX
________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
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