[argyllcms] Re: Fwd: Simple how-to on camera profiling

  • From: Pascal de Bruijn <pmjdebruijn@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:59:58 +0100

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Karljohan Lundin Palmerius
<karljohan.palmerius@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> If scanin can't autodetect the target, the quality of the target shot
>>> is highly questionable, and so will the profiling results be.
>> I have taken lots of images of test charts under lab conditions here, and it
>> happened quite often that scanin either could not detect the target properly,
>> or was off by a little (often by one patch row or column). This also has got 
>> a
>> lot to do with what's around the target. In photography it's a lot more
>> difficult to get that right than with scanners.
>> In the cases where the target was not matched at all, or incorrectly, or just
>> with some inaccuracy slightly too high, finding and passing the fiducial
>> points has helped a lot. And the results of profiling were not really of
>> inferior quality.
> Great news! I'll do what anyone does and select which facts to believe.
> May I ask how you do to find the coordinates of the fiducial points?
> Maybe there is a quick way that I overlooked before? I found it a bit
> troublesome to use a photo editor and manually transfer the
> coordinates corner by corner.
>> Having said that, of course the single biggest aspect for ensuring good
>> profiling quality is to have a properly illuminated target. So curvature
>> matters a lot more than angle, just as you must try to avoid glare.

Maybe you have a sample file to share?

Anyway, in a previous post I attached a ready to go 350D profile, did
you try it?

Pascal de Bruijn

Other related posts: