Re: Epson canned profiles
Re: Epson canned profiles
- Subject: Re: Epson canned profiles
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:53:42 -0600
On Apr 16, 2018, at 4:01 PM, ben <email@hidden
<mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
>
> On Apr 16, 2018, at 2:30 PM, Andrew Rodney <email@hidden
> <mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
>
>> You make up since ideas with one patch of data, from 'wet' papers, without
>> knowing what mode produce what set of data; hilarious.
>
> Takes real chutzpah to knowingly supply bad data for discussion purposes and
> then to laugh at people for giving you the benefit of the doubt that they're
> suitable for discussion.
The absurd is the last refuge of a pundit without an argument!
It takes real chutzpah and loads of foolishness to malign a company and all
it's products after admitting you have never used their produts. Or have a
single measurement of output from their products!
It takes real chutzpah and some foolishness to state the actual colorimetric
data that dismisses your FUD that the data I provided is bad; it isn't
whatsoever. It disproves your FUD.
It takes real chutzpah and foolishness not to understand colorimetrically how
Epson pigmented inks change over time. Unlike you, I've actually measured a
print the second it's come out of an Epson pigmented printer, an hour later and
24 hours later to actually know what colors in color space are affected and by
how much.
It takes real chutzpah and lots of foolishness to dismiss that someone
providing data and understands how pigmented Epson inks behaves, admits his
measurements were made less than 24 hours after printing and It takes real
chutzpah and foolishness to suggest that two prints, measured 2 hours after
printing produce 'bad data'.
It takes real chutzpah and foolishness to assume one output vs. the other,
unnamed and with three differing parameters is solely due to the amount of ink.
It takes real chutzpah and foolishness to look at tiny aStar and bStar values
and make a statement about neutrally without a deltaH report but I know you
can't produce that (ask me if I'll do so for you, will take me about 10
seconds).
It takes real chutzpah and foolishness to suggest that some unnamed profile
package will produce poor/bad RGB profiles depending on some settings and when
asked to provided proof, you don't.
> If that's not an example of bad faith, what is?
It's an example of your sever misunderstanding of color! Clearly this isn't
your day job.
> Congratulations! You've just convinced me that all the rest of the data
> you've supplied is at least as untrustworthy, and nothing you've provided in
> this entire discussion can even hypothetically be taken seriously. How much
> else is "wet" papers, or suffers from other examples of poor technique that
> you on the one hand assure us can't be detected but on the other hand dismiss
> as "hilarious"?
I'm not interested in convincing you of anything buyt rather other's of your
foolishness in posting FUD and proving it's wrong to those others. As I stated
earlier with the Lincoln quote, all doubt is removed as to the foolishness of
your posts over the last two days here.
Your last message you say goodby and that's probably the least foolish text
you've provided here in two days. Tip on holes; when you're deep inside one,
stop digging.
Furhter: The reason there's so much ignorance on the subject of color
management, is that those who have it are so eager to regularly share it! - The
Digital Dog
Now, before we leave, for Steve, I want to make clear that in the dE
differences provided earlier, I didn't change one, not two, but three
parameters in the Epson print driver. As you can see, the differences are tiny
and largely invisible to humans but apparently are to Ben <g>. The differences
were resolution (1440 vs. 2880), high speed (on and off) and Finest Detail (on
and off). And it dismisses Ben's FUD that one profile can't be used for all
output with or without a mix of said sittings. That fellow absolutely doesn't
know what he's talking about and has provided zero data that what he's talking
about is anything but a figment of his imagination.
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/ <http://www.digitaldog.net/>
_______________________________________________
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