Hal V. Engel wrote:
I don't think it is possible that this technique, or a variation of it, would result in profiles that are as good as those generated using a high quality measuring device. But I think that if everything were done in just the right way it might be possible to get profiles that are significantly better than those generated using LPROF "Rough Monitor profiler". In other words it has the potential to be a good "poor mans" technique and it may be the only option available until/unless one of the hardware vendors starts to provide measurement hardware interface software that works on Linux/Unix/BSD machines.
Additional thoughts with regard to this technique :- Normal display profiling measures a single patch at a time. This has the advantage of getting a consistent set of readings, avoiding the effects of spatial variations in the display response. So ideally you need a driver for the camera, so that you can take one picture per patch, and process it automatically. The alternative is to present a full test chart, and take one picture of it (more like printer profiling). This introduces the spatial variation issues, and makes calibration of the display (which is often an interactive process with the software) rather more difficult. Having played the game, I can tell you that profiling a calibrated display gives a much better result than an uncalibrated one, and that calibration has the side effect of improving all your non-color managed color as well. Graeme Gill. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Lcms-user mailing list Lcms-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lcms-user
