[argyllcms] Re: ccmxmake: some questions.
- From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 09:26:21 +1000
Vittorio Villani wrote:
1) Can you tell me if I can get a more
accurate result using –f parameter? On the usage details of ccmxmake I read
that it is possible to use targen and dispread to use generated spectral
readings. Does this give a better result than using the default test patches?
Can you give more information about the number and type of test patches used by
default?
No, the results should be exactly the same. It's just sometimes
more convenient to be able to separate the measurement from the
ccmx creation.
2) I am using high resolution spectral
mode and adaptive emission, do you think that this is a good solution? I read
that the adaptive emission could give more inconsistent results.
High (spectral) resolution may help, but since the measurements are of bright
patches, adaptive is not likely to make any difference.
3) I can’t understand the –s parameter
reading the description. Can you please try to explain again. Do you suggest to
use this parameter considering what I am doing?
It changes the number of test patches. The number of patches is the combinations
given by the parameter. It's there because people requested it. I don't know if
it
has any real effect.
4) I got this result:
XYZ_X XYZ_Y XYZ_Z
0.98177 -6.8614e-003 0.021942
-4.6504e-003 0.98371 1.4480e-003
-0.014964 0.028424 1.0431
Can I interpret this like “your custom NEC colorimeter is not working good on
your NEC
monitor” because of the XYZ values?
That would be making the assumption that the spectrometer is the reference, and
also
assuming that a change of 3% in XYZ values maps to visual significance.
cheers,
Graeme Gill.
Other related posts:
