Re: Another quote from Roy Berns on metamerism-color inconstancy
Re: Another quote from Roy Berns on metamerism-color inconstancy
- Subject: Re: Another quote from Roy Berns on metamerism-color inconstancy
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:52:23 -0700
- Thread-topic: Another quote from Roy Berns on metamerism-color inconstancy
In a message dated 6/18/10 12:07 AM, Ernst Dinkla wrote:
> Marco Ugolini schreef:
>
>> I don't follow. Is that what you read in the quote? I don't.
>
> The quotes define the 100% metameric match or failure conditions.
"The quotes define" nothing of the sort. Where do they define that? Where
exactly? In what words?
> Hue, saturation and value the same for two samples under one light
> source etc. That is what I read.
NEITHER of the Berns quotes that I offered to the forum describes the
conditions for a metameric match. They are about a DIFFERENT topic, that of
distinguishing "metamerism" from "color inconstancy".
That may be "what you read", but you are not allowed to read what is NOT
there and expect me, or anyone, to agree.
> What I "suggested" is a 66.6% variation on that, it can be a single
> neutral B&W print.
> Hue and saturation the same for multiple samples under one light source etc.
What does that have to do with the distinction to which my OP (yes, I
started this thread, so I know) was attempting to direct the forum's
attention? No one was asking for "better conditions for a metameric match"!
Marco Ugolini
_______________________________________________
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