Datacolor User to User Support Group.

1. Yes, it actually takes less time to build a Spyder3 Print profile,  
from more patches, than a ColorMunki profile from fewer patches, since  
the CMunki uses a rather awkward method requiring two passes through  
the process, and two drydowns.

2. Spyder3 is supported in a number of third party applications such  
as ColorEyes, basICColor, and ColorNavigator. Spyder3 Print is  
supported directly by one or two apps, brt can be used indirectly with  
others. The most common 3rd party usage is QTR, and it works great  
with that.

3. Saturation intent is recommended, as something you should try (it  
works great, but the other inrents are fine too), but it's not the  
default.

C. D. Tobie
WW Product Technology Mngr.
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
DataColor.com
CDTobie@...

On Nov 8, 2008, at 11:15 AM, "John Arnold" <john.arnold@...>  
wrote:

> David,
>
> I have a few more questions that have sprung up while contemplating  
> the Spyder 3 Print,
> which by the way is starting to shape up as the winner in my mind.
>
> 1} You made a comment in a dpreview forum recently. You said  
> "Datacolor spectro reads
> much smaller patches, so less ink and paper is used to provide a  
> much greater number of
> patch measurements. It also measures quickly: overall profiling  
> time, even with spot
> measurements, is comparable (or even faster) than other solutions  
> with swiped
> measurements." Can you please elaborate on the "or even faster"  
> portion of your
> comment. The spot measurement feature and time involved measuring  
> has been one of
> the concerns that I have had.
>
> 2) One of the participants in the same dpreview forum said that the  
> Spyder is supported in
> most third party applications. Is that true? I wasn't quite sure  
> what the person was
> referring to.
>
> 3) I noticed in the Northlight-images review that "saturation" is  
> the default rendering
> intent in the software. Why is that when in most published material  
> these days I seem to
> see "relative" as the suggested rendering intent for photography? I  
> presume that's not a
> big deal either way since you can change it anyway?
>
> 4) I have read in Bruce Fraser's "Real World Color Management" that  
> they generally
> recommend reflective spectrophotometers over reflective  
> colorimeters, generally finding
> the former more accurate. Can you comment on that and try to put it  
> in perspective as it
> relates to the Spyder 3 Print as I know Spyder 3 uses a colorimeter?
>
> Thanks again for you feedback.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>