"Full verification"? According to earlier analysis, there is a lot to be said about the need to measure down to 300nm, in order to verify "Full" ISO-3664:2009 conformance. The GL-Optic is a very good device. Most users check light using an i1pro, these days, with BabelColor CT&A and Spectrashop. CRI is only but one test of conformance. The two Metamerism Indexes, both Visible and UV, are more important. Yet, the tristimulus integration is carried using the 1964 10degree Standard Observer whom, we know, has practically zero sensitivity below 400nm. So, why bother with measuring down so deep into the UV to determine "conformance" is one of my take. The other, the 5nm FWHM requirement? That's another story. As things goes, ISO-3664 may be superseded by CQS or some other, new, color scale in a close future. / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users <colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com> On Behalf Of Malcolm Mackenzie via colorsync-users Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 7:48 AM To: Refik Telhan <rtelhan@icloud.com> Cc: colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Subject: ISO-3664:2009 illumination Hello Refik Yes that is true but as with many of the ISO standards I believe we have to make some adjustment for the real world. Roger is using the FD-7, I used a GL SPECTIS 1.0 for the comparison. So good instruments for client side measuring. What is not acceptable and I see it a lot, is the supposed passing of lighting to ISO 3664:2009 using an i1Pro. regards Malcolm On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 11:54, Refik Telhan <rtelhan@icloud.com> wrote:

Dear Malcolm,

A full verification of a light source, as Mr. Claas Bickeböller has said, requires a device like Instrument Systems CAS 140CT-152 (with a range of 200 to 800 nm) which is beyond the reach of the typical printer.

The manufacturers have to take care of the