[argyllcms] Re: FWA Compensation

  • From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 00:09:39 +1100

robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


> The illuminant is a D65 fluorescent and the paper is a Permajet Oyster.

By "D65" I guess you mean D65 white point, not D65 spectrum. The most
critical aspect is the UV content of the illuminant spectrum used in
the calculations. That has to be approximately right in order for FWA
compensation to work.

> Looking at the SPD of the paper it does seem that it has a lot of FWA as
> there is quite a big hump around 400nm.  I don't know how much UV is in the
> lamp.  Could you tell me how I can estimate this doing an M1/M2 measurement?
> (using spotread, I assume?).

That is what illumread is for:

If the D65 is a conventional fluorescent lamp (i.e. not a recent one 
manufactured for proofing and having extra UV ouput), it is likely to
be quite low in UV content.

Graeme Gill.

Other related posts: