Re: i1 Scanning Table
Re: i1 Scanning Table
- Subject: Re: i1 Scanning Table
- From: Martin Weberg <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:01:26 +0100
2010/3/3 Matthew Ward <email@hidden>:
>
> On 2 Mar 2010, at 20:52, Martin Weberg wrote:
>
>> You mean if the spectrophotometer pass the patches in a slightly
>> different path, between the two measurements? Yes, that could
>> introduce errors due to non-uniform patches. This could be eliminated
>> using perfectly uniform test patches.
>
>
> You would have to use something like a Ceram tile, I imagine that there is a
> larger error across a printed patch than there is between readings of most
> spectros.
> If you repeatedly measure the calibration tile (it will hold the spectro in
> the same place) it will show you the measurement repeatability error (for
> that particular colour).
Yes, I've done this on calibration tiles and other materials. You get
a good estimate of accuracy over time for spot readings. However, you
will not be catching errors introduced by movement, patch recognition
algorithms, spatial differences.
Knowing that this kind of test will have errors introduced by multiple
sweep inaccuracy, depending on the test chart uniformity, is a good
start. Then, one should be really careful to recommend instruments
based mainly on chart readings.
How do you sweep a range of ceram tiles or even fit it into the iSis? :-)
Martin Weberg
_______________________________________________
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