On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Karljohan Lundin Palmerius <karljohan.palmerius@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> If scanin can't autodetect the target, the quality of the target shot >>> is highly questionable, and so will the profiling results be. >> >> I have taken lots of images of test charts under lab conditions here, and it >> happened quite often that scanin either could not detect the target properly, >> or was off by a little (often by one patch row or column). This also has got >> a >> lot to do with what's around the target. In photography it's a lot more >> difficult to get that right than with scanners. >> >> In the cases where the target was not matched at all, or incorrectly, or just >> with some inaccuracy slightly too high, finding and passing the fiducial >> points has helped a lot. And the results of profiling were not really of >> inferior quality. > > Great news! I'll do what anyone does and select which facts to believe. > > May I ask how you do to find the coordinates of the fiducial points? > Maybe there is a quick way that I overlooked before? I found it a bit > troublesome to use a photo editor and manually transfer the > coordinates corner by corner. > > >> Having said that, of course the single biggest aspect for ensuring good >> profiling quality is to have a properly illuminated target. So curvature >> matters a lot more than angle, just as you must try to avoid glare. Maybe you have a sample file to share? Anyway, in a previous post I attached a ready to go 350D profile, did you try it? Regards, Pascal de Bruijn