[argyllcms] Re: Contributed ccmx files
- From: Darzur <zurdar@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 18:04:55 +0200
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:47:36 +1100, Graeme Gill
<graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>If you wanted try try this, you could: 1) Create a set of test values using
>targen (a small display test set would do). 2) Use fakeread to create
>.ti3 files from the two profiles 3) Manually add tags for the TARGET_INSTRUMENT
>and INSTRUMENT_TYPE_SPECTRAL YES/NO to the resulting .ti3 files :-
>"TARGET_INSTRUMENT"
>just needs to be set to the name of the instrument, and the reference
>file should be labelled with "INSTRUMENT_TYPE_SPECTRAL YES" and the colorimeter
>labelled with "INSTRUMENT_TYPE_SPECTRAL NO". 4) Feed them into ccmxmake -f.
I've did exactly like you described and I think I got quite good
result. I've created calibration matrix from manufacturers profile and
measurements of my monitor that was set to match profile's
requirements (G2.2 D65). Difference between white points with and
without correction is 15dE, so it's huge. Of course I don't know what
part of this error is at Spyder's side but I think that brand new EIZO
may be better factory calibrated than Spyder. Besides D65 measured
with created matrix looks much more natural (less pinky) that without
correction. At the moment I'm not able to compare this matrix with
real spectro measurement of my monitor, but I will do it in near
future.
--
best regards,
darzur
Other related posts:
