[argyllcms] Re: how many patches, profiling Epson printers

  • From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:04:05 +1000

Roger Breton wrote:

So, it leaves us with method 1. 

You misunderstand, both are needed to improve the process, the first
for improving the characterization of the FWA, and the second for
characterizing how much UV there is in a particular illuminant.

BTW, with my 530 I can measure with and without the UV-cut filter. So that
means that I could apply your method?


The whole system would need adjusting to support such a thing. I didn't see
any point in supporting a manual UV filter/no UV filter method. since
I imagine few people could be bothered with such an arrangement. If
it was software controllable, then it's much more transparent to
the users. The current system works around this limitation, by
making various assumptions about the reflectance characteristics
of "typical" white, FWA free paper. The lack of an accessible
means of measuring UV in illuminants, seems to be a more serious
limitation in practice.

Graeme Gill.


Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. argyllcms
  3. Archive
  4. 07-2005