[argyllcms] Re: Best way to proceed?
- From: Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 11:37:07 -0700
On 2008 Jun 1, at 1:58 PM, Klaus Karcher wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
On 2008 Jun 1, at 3:13 AM, Klaus Karcher wrote:
You can also compare wood measurements taken in close proximity to
get a sense of the variances.
I tried that this morning, too. Even a millimeter made a
significant difference, especially on oak. Indeed, the variation in
sample location is almost enough for different woods to have an
overlapping range of Lab values....
Ok -- I think there's nothing else for it but to take a large number
of measurements for each kind of wood and average them to get an
indication for the "mean" color. As the lightness varies very much
with the angle, the a/b coordinates are more meaningful. You can
also draw the a/b values of all your readings in a scatterplot and
look for marked-off "clouds" for different kinds of wood.
I don't think I'll need to do that at this point, but it'll be the
first thing I try if I'm still not happy. I'm especially thinking of
Photoshop's select color tool to help identify the centers of those
``clouds.''
BTW: the i1 uses 45/0° geometry (illumination at 45 degrees to the
sample's normal and measurement on the sample's normal). Even though
the illumination should be approximately circular, it's a good idea
to rotate the sample or measurement device amongst the measurements
to get better averages.
Sounds like 3-4 samples per location, if I go that route. Thanks!
Cheers,
b&
Other related posts:
