Roger Breton wrote:
My remark was not intended to take away value from dispcalGUI because the user still needs to interact with dispcal inside a shell window, in the background. I think I was under the wrong impression. I don't think you need to spend time hiding Argyll's commande line interface completely as you probably have lot's of other, more interesting priorities. So, please, unless this is really easy to do, cross-platform, which I don't suspect is that easy, leave dispcalGUI the way it is. Besides, it's fine that the user sees the progress of dispcal in a shell window.
Ok. It's still something that I might look into, in the future, also out of my own curiosity ;)
Are there options in dispcal that will launch dispcal on its own, without requiring any user intervention? Like a completely automated way of going about calibrating and profiling?
I think atleast the initial keypress is always needed, even when skipping monitor adjustments.
I think you could add some mention of the fact that dispcalGUI is not designed to completely hide or encapsulate the functionality of dispcal, that some interaction with the dispcal is still required inside a shell.
It actually is mentioned further down in the ReadMe (under the "calibrating / profiling" topic), but maybe I should also add it to a more prominent place like the "about" section.
This being said, Florian, do you also have a similar GUI for the printer or scanner part of Argyll?
No. I certainly thought about it, but then decided it would be too complex for me to handle the vast functionality provided by the other Argyll utils in a somewhat adequate way.
Yes, it generally benefits from a larger sample count. Reason for the smaller default testchart is that it takes less time, for people whowant a quicker profileCan a generalization or some alert be made in the interface, perhaps in the TestChart file drop down menu that the default 127 samples testchart for LUT profile will not yield a very high quality profile? That it may be adequate for slow instruments, like the filter-based colorimeters, but faster instruments will benefit from the 512 higher sample count.
Good idea, I think that's what I will do.
BTW, I still to experiment with the options in the Extra menu. Like calibration and profile verification.
There's currently no profile verification per se (I plan to add something like that though). The verification for calibrated/uncalibrated display is a shortcut to dispcal -r and -R, respectively.
Last but not least, can the Spyder3 be used, today, with dispcal?
Only the instruments currently working with Argyll, so, no. Regards, Florian Höch