The UV filter will prevent UV light from the lamp in the spectrophotometer from reaching the sample, and thus prevent it from fluorescing. So measuring with a UV filter will only give you a visual match when viewing your fabric under lights that don't emit UV (not a typical situation).
The problem with the "regular" devices (no filter), is that the amount of UV energy from the spectrophotometer's lamp is unlikely to match that of your viewing environment, and so the fabric will fluoresce differently, again giving a different visual appearance from what you're measuring. Some profiling packages have tried correcting for this in software, although I don't know how well this would work, if at all.
My understanding is that devices with UV filters are used with samples that fluoresce to provide better inter-instrument agreement. This way you can compare the colorimetric data between an i1 and DTP41, for example. But if you want your whiter-than-whites to read as brighter, you need to use a device without a UV filter. You might even get L* values over 100. Who knows what that does to profiling software.
You might be better off with a Spectrolino, which has interchangeable filters, so you could try it both ways.
cheers, jeff
From: Glenn Wilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Lcms-user] UV or no UV Filter To: Armindo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Monaco ... We are using a Spectrocam .. but we are changing to the Eye-one as its USB and will with work more software
Glenn Wilton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
