[argyllcms] Re: [argyllcms] Re: how many patches, profiling Epson printers
- From: "Gerhard Fuernkranz" <nospam456@xxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:09:26 +0200 (MEST)
> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> The FWA compensation can't work if you have a UV filter fitted, since
> it relies on some UV from the instrument illuminant, to estimate the
> response of the FWA in the paper.
Graeme,
may I conclude:
The more UV is present in the instrument's light source, the more accurate
the prediction will be? Or is this a stupid assumption? E.g. can I expect a
better prediction for the radiance factors under D50, when I use a Xenon
light source, than with a tungsten lamp?
Regards,
Gerhard
--
5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++
Other related posts:
