[argyllcms] Re: Is the ColorChecker SG worth the high price?
- From: Nikolay Pokhilchenko <nikolay_po@xxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 09:55:11 +0400
I have ColorChecker SG. It works better than other targets. I've tested
custom-made targets, printed on inkjet printer and printed in photo minilab.
The results of RAW conversion with profiles by custom targets was mostly worser
than camera JPEG images. The results with ColorChecker was mixed. The most
problem with ColorChecker was the absence of dynamic range comperssion. The
photos with ColorChecker SG profiles are dark or with oversaturated channels
(with clipped highlights). In generaly, the color tones on images converted
with ColorChecker SG profile are more natural than camera JPEG or profiles by
other targets.
Because of few patches, I can build only the gamma+matrix profie with SG
targets. LUT or even shaper+matrix profile generally unacceptable.
26 Oct. 2011, 04:31 Stephen T wrote:
Hello Argyll CMS users,
The X-Rite ColorChecker SG costs around US$259. X-Rite targets are unique(?)
with patches composed of multiple different pigments, giving reflective spectra
that are more representative of the real world. On the other hand, the
ColorChecker SG has 'only' 140 patches versus some other targets with two or
three times as many patches.
I am hoping for a reliable camera profile. A simple matrix profile would do. My
experience so far with an IT8.7/2 target has been mixed, results are sometimes
good but sometimes the rendering doesn't look right. I have also noted that the
camera manufacturer's RAW converter (and the camera output itself) sometimes
produces unsatisfactory colours! I have a calibrated and profiled wide-gamut
LCD for critical evaluation of results.
I would like to hear of users experiences with the ColorChecker SG. Are profile
made with this target noticeably better than profiles made with other targets?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of this target? Is it worth the high
price?
Stephen.
Other related posts:
