scott wrote:
> Yes, this is what happens when a company is "floated", 

In the USA, this is called "going public."  The private owners (and the 
bank) tends to make a whole lot more money than the company is actually 
worth at that moment.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Still not really seeing how having a more expensive monitor helps 
> here... It's not like the quality of the monitor affects what colour the 
> printer prints.

When you're creating the initial image, you need to know what it's going to 
look like when it's printed.

Say you're taking pictures of meat to put on packaging. You take the photo, 
then you color-balance it until it looks juicy and delicious. [*] Now you 
ask your software what colors are in the photo, so you can give those colors 
to the printer.

If your monitor makes pink look like orange and orange look like yellow, 
then when you tell the printer to print out what you see on the monitor, 
you're going to be disappointed.

The monitor doesn't affect what color the printer prints. It affects what 
color you think you should be telling the printer to print.




[*] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7BuQFUhsRM#t=18s

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message

> Say you're taking pictures of meat to put on packaging.

Another point that is quite surprising (to me it was at least) is that 
pretty much every mass produced food is manufactured or bought to strict 
colour standards.  The reason being that any "odd" coloured food tends 
to get left on the shelf and scrapped, so the big shops demand the 
colour is within a certain tolerance.  This really is no joke, I met a 
colour scientist once who worked in a bread factory, he was having 
problems with the crumbs getting into the colour measurement equipment 
(costing far more than $1000).

Post a reply to this message

On 15/02/2011 08:52 AM, scott wrote:
>> Say you're taking pictures of meat to put on packaging.
>
> Another point that is quite surprising (to me it was at least) is that
> pretty much every mass produced food is manufactured or bought to strict
> colour standards. The reason being that any "odd" coloured food tends to
> get left on the shelf and scrapped, so the big shops demand the colour
> is within a certain tolerance. This really is no joke, I met a colour
> scientist once who worked in a bread factory, he was having problems
> with the crumbs getting into the colour measurement equipment (costing
> far more than $1000).

What a crumby job that was!

Post a reply to this message

On 2/14/2011 10:31 AM, Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Still not really seeing how having a more expensive monitor helps
>> here... It's not like the quality of the monitor affects what colour
>> the printer prints.
>
> When you're creating the initial image, you need to know what it's going
> to look like when it's printed.
>
Course, in principle, most systems can now use a "profile" for the 
printer and display, so that, in theory, as long as you can also get 
data from the display on what tweaks you have made to it, what you see 
in the screen is "translated" through the profiles, to match what you 
see to what has been printed.

This sort of works, some times. lol Usually, its just better to have a 
display that is accurate, and printer that is, and thus, again, in 
principle, have the two properly match colors properly. Usually that 
meant a real high end printer, and a screen that supported "way" more 
colors than a standard display, and had been "pre-tuned" to exact 
specifications. Now.. most of them are pretty close to start with, and 
most printers do a pretty fair job of producing similar output, so its a 
bit less critical, except when it isn't.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> data from the display on what tweaks you have made to it,

I'm not sure how this would differ from a calibrated monitor. Of course, 
monitors and printers are going to have their own profiles, to translate 
from the standard calibration into whatever they need themselves for their 
own individual inks or electronics.

> have the two properly match colors properly. 

That's the calibration.

> a standard display, and had been "pre-tuned" to exact 
> specifications. 

That's the calibration, yes?

> most printers do a pretty fair job of producing similar output, so its a 
> bit less critical, except when it isn't.

They do now that people have decided on a calibration.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message

>> have the two properly match colors properly.
>
> That's the calibration.

I would have said that "calibration" implies that they measured not what 
the average product does, but what the particular one you purchased 
does. (I.e., it's set up per-device.)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On 15/02/2011 7:00 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> have the two properly match colors properly.
>>
>> That's the calibration.
>
> I would have said that "calibration" implies that they measured not what
> the average product does, but what the particular one you purchased
> does. (I.e., it's set up per-device.)
>

Then you would be wrong.
Calibration is done to individual items. You cannot present a 
calibration certificate to an inspector for a group of items.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> On 15/02/2011 7:00 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> have the two properly match colors properly.
>>>
>>> That's the calibration.
>>
>> I would have said that "calibration" implies that they measured not what
>> the average product does, but what the particular one you purchased
>> does. (I.e., it's set up per-device.)
>>
> 
> Then you would be wrong.
> Calibration is done to individual items. You cannot present a 
> calibration certificate to an inspector for a group of items.

I think that's what he said. And yes, I wasn't talking about the "average" 
set-up. Of course everyone tries to get their "average" displays looking right.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message

On 15/02/2011 8:58 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Stephen wrote:

>> Then you would be wrong.
>> Calibration is done to individual items. You cannot present a
>> calibration certificate to an inspector for a group of items.
>
> I think that's what he said. And yes, I wasn't talking about the
> "average" set-up. Of course everyone tries to get their "average"
> displays looking right.
>

Excuse me, I have a cold.

Ooops! Tired eyes. Will I ever be forgiven? :-)


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message