• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness


  • Subject: RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
  • From: "Mike Eddington" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:54:47 -0400
  • Thread-topic: Correlating Tappi Brightness

>>Tappi uses an illuminant C type of light source,
>>unlike the tungsten light source used in an EyeOnePro, for instance.

I believe that the illuminant "C" is  mathematically equated from the
tungsten illuminant of the measurement device, rather than a true "C"
illuminant in the measurement device. At least that's how it has to be
for our Xrite 938 that measures Tappi brightness. Yes, there would
definitely be a discrepency correlating brightness using illuminant C to
D50 CIELab, which is why I indicated that the measurement device (0/45)
and illuminant would ideally be he same.

>>Personally, I never tried to relate the two measurements
>>mathematically, in Excel, for instance. I live with 72
>>Brightness corresponding to L89 for
>>SWOP5 and 88 Brightness corresponding to L92 SWOP3. I know,
>>far from perfect.

I think brightness on the whole is far from perfect myself. I'm not
really sure why one would even want to correlate brightness to L*a*b*,
jut wondered if it were mathematically possible.

Thanks Roger,

Mike


 _______________________________________________
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

  • Follow-Ups:
    • RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
      • From: Roger <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Correlating Tappi Brightness (From: Mike Eddington <email@hidden>)
 >RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness (From: Roger <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
  • Next by Date: RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
  • Previous by thread: RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
  • Next by thread: RE: Correlating Tappi Brightness
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread