[argyllcms] Re: DTP20 (Pulse) patch size error

  • From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 19:44:18 +1000

Philip Reed wrote:
> Argyll doesn't ask to read the TID strip.  This is what I get:

If you do an un-tethered set of readings (ie. using the TID),
does it work any better ?

> The row patches from Argyll are 6.4 by 10 mm while the patches from
> MonacoPROFILER are 6.7 by 12 mm.  The TID patches are 6mm by 10mm for Argyll
> and 6mm by 12 mm for Monaco.

I'd be really surprised if a width difference of 2 mm is going to make
any difference, given how much margin it has over the length.

Are the Argyll patches really 6.4 mm ? (ie. is the average over
the length of all the patches in the strip ?).
I wonder if there is a small scaling error in the printing,
and it is enough to take the patch below its minimum.

> Is the instrument sensing bleed from the rows above and below that aren't
> being masked using the Argyll chart?  About a mm of the row above and below
> isn't covered. 

Unlikely, since the aperture must be less than 6 mm if it is to read
the patch cleanly.

Looking at the test chart spec., it is possible to change the DTP20
patch length to some other values, although I haven't currently allowed
for it. I'll see about adding this for the next release.

Graeme Gill.

Other related posts: