Re: uv and measurements.
Re: uv and measurements.
- Subject: Re: uv and measurements.
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 02:59:27 +0000 (UTC)
Hi to all,
In answer to some of Chris's question.
"legacy light source unspecified" simply means that there was no real specification of light source type. Vendors of spectral instruments had a great deal of freedom to use the technology that seemed most effective at the time of design. Designers had the freedom to chose operating points, color temperatures, spectral distributions as they saw fit. There wasn't too any problems until OBA became a prevalent part of the market.
My comments about using M1 were a bit tongue in cheek. You will note that I also said that a huge number of useful profiles had been generated with M0 instruments. The key issue is that these instruments may disagree when presented with media that have aggressive amounts of OBA.
UV cut measurements eliminate the UV illumination and they should be less sensitive to media. The real issue is what is happening in the light booth. The measurements that I made of commercial booths showed a huge variablity in UV output. This is where the linkage between visual process, the measurement process and a good profile that start to diverge. These are issues that are being addressed, but without greater uniformity in the display booth or a way to actively measure the UV content in the booth, it will be difficult to solve the problem.
As I said, there is a recognition of the problem, but a solution is bit off in time.
Regards,
Tom
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:11:08 -0500
From: "Chris McFarling" < email@hidden >
Subject: Re: uv and measurements.
To: < email@hidden >
Message-ID: <C2A00C41E7C8472CA5D77BA7FC2E1FC4@helo>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
Yes confusion is rampant not only in regard to this topic but to color
management in general. On one hand these products and technologies are
marketed in such a way as to make a color managed workflow easy. But for
anyone who has tried to implement a full blown color managed workflow you
know that it is nowhere near easy. There are so many caveats that you need a
consultant or someone with nearly consultant level knowledge to do it right
and maintain it I think, for anything but the most simplest of workflows.
Anyway, speaking of confusion, I'm not clear on what you mean by "legacy
light source unspecified" when referring to the M0 condition. First of all
which X-Rite spectro models fall into this category? Would this be devices
such as EyeOne, DTP70, DTP41? Obviously the light source of these devices is
known. Does that mean that the amount of UV in the light source is unknown?
Likewise which devices would fall into the M2 category? Any of those same
devices with a UV filter on them?
You mentioned that no one currently makes an M1 device but then you
recommended using an M1 device if making a measurement that is intended to
represent the visual process. That's a bit confusing as well. What should we
take from that?
Thanks,
Chris McFarling
_______________________________________________
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