[argyllcms] Re: More direct method of measuring FWA?
- From: Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:44:35 -0700
On 2010 Jul 22, at 9:39 PM, Graeme Gill wrote:
> The main weakness in using the FWA compensation is characterising the
> illuminant.
I've come to realize this on a more visceral level lately. Not long ago I had
side-by-side samples of some papers, one with and one without brighteners. And
I just happened to take them from sunlight to fluorescent to incandescent
lighting in a span of minutes. The difference was dramatic in sunlight, obvious
in fluorescent, and subtle under incandescent.
If I may suggest? Everybody interested in this topic should find a Tyvek
envelope and compare it with some cheap bright-white office paper under direct
outdoor sunlight and then a 60-watt incandescent bulb. Tyvek is almost as good
as PTFE as a 99%+ flat-spectrum reflector. Most CD envelopes are made of Tyvek,
and you can get a pack of Tyvek mailers at any office supply store.
> No
> affordable instrument is capable of measuring the Ultra Violet wavelengths.
> In V1.2.0 I have created a new tool (illumread) that provides an indirect way
> of
> doing this, by making use of the FWA algorithm.
Wonderful! I'm looking forward to it, even (especially) though I now realize
that it's a far more complex problem than I ever imagined before.
Cheers,
b&
Other related posts:
