Thank you for your reply. My lighting is a compact flourescent made
by Philips and has a very high CRI=82 and is 5000k. After work I'm
going to profile the monitors again and also compare some prints with
a professional profile, which I was never too keen on.
--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 3/1/06 9:30:55 AM, jonathanwilliams306@...
writes:
>
>
> > I have two computers (one old and one new)sitting on the same
desk. One
> > goes on the web and the new one is strictly for photo editing.
Both
> > monitors which are LCDs, have been profiled and they look the
same, so
> > I assume that the Spyder worked. Gamma 2.2 and 6500K. Photos on
both
> > LCDs look good with what I consider good color.
> >
> > So far, so good...
>
> > I have also profiled both Ilford Classic Pearl, Classic Smooth
Pearl
> > and Colorlife paper for my Canon i9100. I used Perceptual when
making
> > the proiles. Amazingly all the profiles are very consistant, but
all
> > are yellowish. I have to add +5 blue to the profile to make it
come
> > out close to the monitors. It's not a big deal, but I figured
that
> > everything would match closer than it is.
> >
> Canon i9100 printers use dye ink, and are prone to color shifting
under
> differing light sources (illuminant metamerism, for short). You
don't mention what
> kind of light source you are viewing your prints under, but
whatever it is,
> with this printer, your choice of final color balance and
neutrality tweeks will
> be slightly different under other types of lighting. The fix, and
you note,
> is quite straightforward, which is good, as the issue can't be
eliminated
> without removing all illuminant metamerism from all colorant/media
combinations.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>