[argyllcms] Re: profiling camera

  • From: nino loss <nino@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2011 16:34:19 +0300

Would it be therefore better to leave out -r or to even increase it above the average?


On 8/7/2011 4:29 PM, Graeme Gill wrote:
nino loss wrote:
Just changing colprof to -un and -r0 got the values down to peak 0.6
and 0.28! Also I set -al as C1 is expecting LUT with LAB PCS.
Yes, but this doesn't prove much with such a small number of test
patches. By setting -r0 the interpolation between the test patches
has low stiffness, and therefore may model the underlying
device behaviour in a _worse_ fashion than what you had before
without -r0. Remember that the real measure of accuracy is to the
actual underlying device behaviour, not the self fit to the test

Graeme Gill.

Other related posts: