[argyllcms] Re: Culling outliers from .ti3 input data before camera profiling
- From: edmund ronald <edmundronald@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 01:38:44 +0200
The problem with Colorcheckers is the reduced number of pigments employed.
Homemade targets *will* actually provide more info than a Colorchecker ...
Edmund
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2012-07-10, at 6:27 AM, edmund ronald wrote:
>
> > If you really want a good camera profile, Image Engineering sell some
> devices which can quickly and precisely do the job with the help of a bunch
> of narrowband filters.
>
> ...at a cost of €9750, which is $12,000 at today's exchange rates. I'm
> sure it's an awesome tool, but you don't need to spend that kind of money
> to get a good camera profile.
>
> Hint: your local home improvement store should be able to custom match all
> the (classic) ColorChecker colors. And that'll be a spectral match, too --
> the resulting paint will have the same SPD curve as the ColorChecker
> patches. Your local artist's supply shop has a selection of paints (and
> what-not) with an even wider gamut. Tyvek and teflon thread tape both have
> (roughly) a 99% reflective flat spectrum, and light traps are easy to make.
> For bonus points, include samples of the actual objects whose color you're
> looking to reproduce....
>
> It'll take a bit of time to put it together. But, unless your hourly rate
> is similar to the rental rate of a corporate jet, you'll still come out
> ahead.
>
> b&
>
Other related posts:
