RE: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
RE: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
- Subject: RE: Colorimeters and third-party developer support
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 05:47:25 -0400
Rich,
> I understand your point, and that might justify not giving third-party
developers access to the keys, so to speak, for software to access > the
hardware controls on their display. That's a separate issue from not
allowing developers the ability to use the custom colorimeter > to make
*measurements* from the display (or for the end user to use a different
measurement device like an EyeOne Pro with their > software).
True. That's a complete separate issue. Why do some manufacturers refuse
obstinately to allow third-party to use their custom colorimeters to make
measurements from the display? I can only see business reasons, to protect
their "investment" or to lock customers into their proprietary solutions.
That is lame too.
> Are the displays perfect as shipped from the factory? Only if you're
lucky. I sent our first panel back on day one, as it had an obvious
> magenta/green tint across the panel. Others had similar quality control
issues. The panel we received as replacement was excellent.
Another separate issue for which there is no excuses. I agree.
> But part of the reason for purchasing the "Advanced Profiling Solution"
for $350 is to be able to verify quality over time, and the
> matched colorimeter is an integral component of that process.
You can say that.
> How long should "factory calibration" be expected to last on a newly
designed, cutting edge monitor? I have no idea.
Some manufacturers go at great length to custom measure their displays
before they ship out to customers and built internal feedback mechanisms to
stabilize them over time. What's to protect against the inevitable drift,
however? Can't it be argued that custom colorimeters will also drift over
time? Will you want to pay $250 for an HP (i1displayII) to be recalibrate
over time? Probably not. So where does one "draw" the line? That's a
separate issue, still, to me. But it can be argued that drift could be
monitored and corrected for, visually, with the help of stable "standards"
such as the Munsell ColorChecker charts. Might not serve hard colorimetric
numbers to chew on but it will serve the purpose well, IMO.
> Unfortunately,
> the colorimeter cannot be used with third-party verification tools, and
the software supplied with the colorimeter has no verification
> tool. (To this day, we have to run the APS software from a dedicated OS X
user account or it hangs.)
This breaks my heart. Makes me think of all the past software that was good
for a given version of an OS and have become obsolete because of OS
upgrades. The essence of marketing, planned obsolescence, applies here more
than any other sector of industries. Best stick with Argyll...
> I agree that visual matching is very important, but I don't think that,
taken by itself, it's sufficient.
See, that depends on the application, to me.
But, ultimately, what are you going to trust more : your eye balls or some
instruments cold numbers?
Roger
_______________________________________________
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