Re: Do I need to upgrade to i1Profiler?
Re: Do I need to upgrade to i1Profiler?
- Subject: Re: Do I need to upgrade to i1Profiler?
- From: Mike Strickler <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:24:26 -0700
Ah, this makes a lot of sense. The key is that these are LEDs, and apparently there is no LED that can emit both the needed visible wavelengths and the UV (and maybe near-UV violet as well), at least not with the required uniformity--maybe not at all. Takes two different ones. Now that I know immutable physical laws are behind this I won't be asking the question again. Thanks, Marc.
On Apr 11, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Marc Levine wrote:
> Mike,
> Forgot this one. It’s actually a fairly easy explanation. The iSis works that way because it was designed to work that way. There’s no tricking it, or fooling it into something different (as much as many people including myself would like to do). The iSis collects the visible spectrum and UV spectrum in different passes using different illumination sources. It’s got 2 in there: one standard LED to illuminate the visible spectrum and one “UV” LED to “illuminate” the UV. Therefore, to capture both the visible and UV components, you need to scan twice.
>
> Could X-Rite (or GMB at the time) have built the device with a single - full spectrum LED? Maybe. But then you’d basically have a DTP70, requiring a hard-filter to switch the measurement mode. Actually, at that point, you’d probably have to revisit the illuminant choice. Long-story short, full-range LED was probably out. The next question that follows is probably: “Why can’t they turn both on at once?” What I would say here is this: if they could have done this, then they would have done this. I presume that this was some kind of technical limitation, but I cannot say for sure.
>
> So that brings you to the current state. There is definitely a “time penalty” on the UV-included measurement cycle. However, I believe that the intent of the iSis was not primarily not to build the fastest commercially-available prepress UV-included XY chart scanner in the world (which, save for the iO, it is, I think...). I believe the goal was to provide the user with the fastest measurement device that would give you both data sets. In theory, this would be a powerful enabler for OBC, and give users a “both” option when the question was: “to UV or not to UV?”
>
> So,that’s my spiel on it. It is what it is, which ain’t bad. Please note that these opinions do not reflect those of X-Rite’s. These are really just educated perspectives, based on my personal experience with the company, and with technology in general. I would leave it to X-Rite to make any official communications about why things are the way they are in X-Rite land.
>
> -Marc
>
>
> On Apr 10, 2011, at 3:03 PM, email@hidden wrote:
>
>> 5. A major crime remains unredressed with this release, or has it? The wondrous iSis, jewel in the i1 crown, runs at half-speed for those who insist on including ultra violet in their measurements as it doggedly adds a second pass in UV-cut mode (technically no-UV-included, as there's no UV to cut). Can someone finally tell us why UV-filtering freaks get the only fast mode? Why is this the default in this day and age? Is this dictated by devious instrument design logic? Is a UV-excluded pass perversely needed to simulate the UV? Anyone? Marc? Ray Cheydleur?
>
_______________________________________________
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