Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Eye-One - Matrix vs. LUT method
Luminous Landscape Forum > Raw & Post Processing, Printing > Colour Management
theophilus
If I calibrate with "matrix" mode and run the profile validator I get delta-E's of 40-50 for each color.

If I calibrate withe "LUT" mode I get delta-E's of 0.1-0.3.

First, can someone explain the difference in the modes (or point me to an article).

Second, I realize the delta-E's aren't totally useful here since I am using the same device to check it's own profile, but why the wildly divergent numbers?
digitaldog
QUOTE (theophilus @ Aug 19 2008, 07:59 AM)
Second, I realize the delta-E's aren't totally useful here since I am using the same device to check it's own profile, but why the wildly divergent numbers?
*


They are actually pretty useless in terms of tying to gauge the quality of the profiles.

How do gradients and other images appear when you assign the profile to the docs and view them in Photoshop?
theophilus
Do you mean assign the monitor profile to the documents using "convert to profile"?

I tried that and I don't see any banding in a gradient image with either profile.
digitaldog
QUOTE (theophilus @ Aug 19 2008, 04:21 PM)
Do you mean assign the monitor profile to the documents using "convert to profile"?

I tried that and I don't see any banding in a gradient image with either profile.
*


No, Assign Profile. And the test should be done based on this PDF:
http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200412_rodneycm.pdf
theophilus
Thanks for the link.

The matix mode gives me better separation in the blacks (4-6) vs the LUT (6-8).

Both seem a bit to the greenish side in the greys, but it felt like my eyes would adjust for it if I didn't step through too quickly.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.