[argyllcms] Re: Dell U2711 - is it any good?
- From: Rishi Sanyal <rishi.j.sanyal@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:56:00 -0700
Graeme Gill wrote:
"I don't agree with you. Producing a colorimetric instrument that includes
it's individual spectral characterisation seems like a worthwhile advance
to me, with tangible benefits.
I didn't realize that's what they were doing. They're including the
spectral transmission characteristics of the filters? That's pretty
cool. But you'd still need a spectrophotometer to ensure accuracy with
any future display, no?
-Rishi
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:32 AM, Gerhard Fuernkranz <nospam456@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Am 21.06.2011 20:42, schrieb Knut Inge:
>>
>> Should the Spyder 3 correction curve ideally be 7-channel (as it is a
>> 7-channel native sensor), or is it sufficient to do correction of the
>> 3-channel default mix of those?
>
> Combining 7 channels to XYZ would basically require a 7x3 matrix. While a
> 3-channel sensor with a 3x3 correction matrix is only valid (accurate) for a
> single display model, a 7-channel sensor in conjunction with a 7x3 matrix
> can simultaneously be valid for two different display models with unrelated
> spectra of their primaries (granted that the sensor sensitivities have been
> carefully selected).
>
> Note that we have to distinguish between the internal, built-in correction
> matrix of the instrument, and an Argyll ccmx correction matrix. A ccmx is
> applied in addition to the built-in matrix of the instrument. It is still a
> 3x3 matrix even if the device had 7 channels and the internal matrix of the
> instrument was a 7x3 matrix.
>
> Regards,
> Gerhard
>
>
>
Other related posts:
