Datacolor User to User Support Group.

> To make this interpretation, you would have to set up some other
(laboratory 
> grade) device as a standard, and judge the DC 1005 compared to that.
Which is 
> exactly what is done in testing the 1005 in the first place. The
BCRA ceramic 
> tile set that Datacolor (and Gretag) use to test their instruments
are not 
> that different than the ColorChecker in formulation, so there is no
reason to 
> expect that that accuracy measuring these patches should be much
worse than the 
> inter-instrument agreement value in the 1005 spec. Given that they
are fairly 
> similar color sets, I would expect the quoted .4 average and 1.0 max
to be 
> about right. So there is plenty of slop left over to blame on other
things...   
> For instance the ColorChecker has been reformulated. so there are
batch to batch 
> issues. Where did you get your CC reference file? Can you send me your 
> reference file, so I can compare it to what I see from various
spectros on the Color 
> Checker?
> 
> thanks,
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>

Thanks for the assistance.  

The only reference material supplied to me with the Mini ColorChecker
card was printed in the pamphlet (CIELAB 2degree D50 Standard
Observer).  I will e-mail you my spreadsheet for reference in a few
moments.  It does go to show you how "reference" color charts can get
pretty far off their published values.  I intend to use the values
supplied to me by the 1005 which are probably much closer to reality!