Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.image.processing > #4356 > unrolled thread

ICC profile for a light box

Back to article view | Back to sci.image.processing

Contents

  ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-25 06:02 -0400
    Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-25 07:38 -0400
      Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-25 08:33 -0400
        Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-25 11:21 -0400
          Re: ICC profile for a light box Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2018-07-26 12:43 +1200
      Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-30 19:44 -0400
        Re: ICC profile for a light box Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2018-07-30 17:31 -0700
          Re: ICC profile for a light box Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2018-07-30 17:33 -0700
            Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-30 21:49 -0400
              Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-30 21:57 -0400
                Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 05:52 -0400
                  Re: ICC profile for a light box Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2018-07-31 06:01 -0700
                    Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 09:58 -0400
                      Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-31 10:06 -0400
                        Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 10:22 -0400
                      Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 10:30 -0400
                        Re: ICC profile for a light box Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2018-07-31 07:46 -0700
                          Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 11:59 -0400
                            Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 20:35 -0400
                    Re: ICC profile for a light box Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2018-08-01 12:24 +1200
                      Re: ICC profile for a light box Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-08-02 09:54 +0100
                        Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-08-02 15:48 -0400
                          Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-08-05 14:31 -0400
              Re: ICC profile for a light box Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2018-07-30 19:07 -0700
                Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 05:51 -0400
          Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-30 21:45 -0400
            Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-30 21:46 -0400
              Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 05:52 -0400
                Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-31 07:07 -0400
              Re: ICC profile for a light box PeterN <"peter,newdelete"@deleteverizon.net> - 2018-08-02 18:28 -0400
        Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-30 21:31 -0400
          Re: ICC profile for a light box dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2018-07-30 21:47 -0400
          Re: ICC profile for a light box Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2018-08-01 12:28 +1200
            Re: ICC profile for a light box nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-31 20:59 -0400

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#4388

On 01/08/2018 01:24, Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 06:01:58 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Jul 31, 2018, dale wrote
>> (in article <bfm11i.dud.17.2@news.alt.net>):
>>
>>> On 7/30/2018 9:57 PM, nospam wrote:
>>>> In article<bfl4oa.9ei.19.3@news.alt.net>, dale<dale@dalekelly.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> might be a nice feature for Lightroom ... compatible with some
>>>>> measurement instruments ... and data like viewing angle, white point, etc.
>>>>
>>>> lightroom has been fully colour managed since day one.
>>>
>>> there is a difference between managing color and managing appearance,
>>> look up CIECAM02 on wikipedia
>>>
>>> viewing environment like a light room is one variable in appearance
>>
>> What exactly do you believe is a *light room*?
>>
>> Understand that any viewing environment is going to be influenced by amient
>> light, regardless of the specific light source be it day light, or any type
>> of artificial lighting.
>>
>> What is your specific, or special purpose/interest for needing this specific
>> icc profile for a *light room* (not LR the app)?
>>
>> It doesn’t sound as though you have any interest in color management for
>> photography post processing.
> 
> My impression is quite the contrary. Why else do you need color
> management if it is to enable the management and control of the
> appearance of the finished print? The process starts with the object,
> continues through the camera, the processing in computer (which
> includes the screen or monitor), on through the printer and paper and
> surely (and this is the subject of the OP's original post) includes
> the viewing environment.

Provided that the light approximates a blackbody with a characteristic 
temperature then the human eye's automatic white balance does a very 
good job of removing the orange or blue casts that a camera will 
faithfully record (if it is set to record the absolute RGB image). 
Remember in the old days of daylight vs artificial light films?

You cannot control the lighting environment that prints will be viewed 
in and some peaky LED or mercury line fluorescent lamps can mess stuff 
up. But if you avoid the obvious pitfalls then comparison by eye with 
the original object is OK under real incandescent light or sunlight.

There are a handful of materials whose colours alter radically depending 
on the colour temperature of the light that they are seen in didymium 
glass being one such and the gemstone Alexandrite another. They are 
unusual in that they have a deep cut notch in their transmission 
spectrum in the yellow which makes their perceived (and measured) colour 
vary significantly with the ambient lighting characteristics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysoberyl#Alexandrite

Most pigments and dyes used in colour printing avoid having these 
characteristics to prevent a print from appearing significantly 
different depending on the colour temperature of the ambient light.

You still have problems in a mixture of incandescent and daylight though 
if the proportions vary across the object. Compared to the subjective 
errors caused by well known optical illusions there is little point in 
obsessing about total control of everything for one particular lighting 
situation unless you can control the display environment precisely.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4389

On 8/2/2018 4:54 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 01/08/2018 01:24, Eric Stevens wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 06:01:58 -0700, Savageduck
>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 31, 2018, dale wrote
>>> (in article <bfm11i.dud.17.2@news.alt.net>):
>>>
>>>> On 7/30/2018 9:57 PM, nospam wrote:
>>>>> In article<bfl4oa.9ei.19.3@news.alt.net>, dale<dale@dalekelly.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> might be a nice feature for Lightroom ... compatible with some
>>>>>> measurement instruments ... and data like viewing angle, white 
>>>>>> point, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> lightroom has been fully colour managed since day one.
>>>>
>>>> there is a difference between managing color and managing appearance,
>>>> look up CIECAM02 on wikipedia
>>>>
>>>> viewing environment like a light room is one variable in appearance
>>>
>>> What exactly do you believe is a *light room*?
>>>
>>> Understand that any viewing environment is going to be influenced by 
>>> amient
>>> light, regardless of the specific light source be it day light, or 
>>> any type
>>> of artificial lighting.
>>>
>>> What is your specific, or special purpose/interest for needing this 
>>> specific
>>> icc profile for a *light room* (not LR the app)?
>>>
>>> It doesn’t sound as though you have any interest in color management for
>>> photography post processing.
>>
>> My impression is quite the contrary. Why else do you need color
>> management if it is to enable the management and control of the
>> appearance of the finished print? The process starts with the object,
>> continues through the camera, the processing in computer (which
>> includes the screen or monitor), on through the printer and paper and
>> surely (and this is the subject of the OP's original post) includes
>> the viewing environment.
> 
> Provided that the light approximates a blackbody with a characteristic 
> temperature then the human eye's automatic white balance does a very 
> good job of removing the orange or blue casts that a camera will 
> faithfully record (if it is set to record the absolute RGB image). 
> Remember in the old days of daylight vs artificial light films?
> 
> You cannot control the lighting environment that prints will be viewed 
> in and some peaky LED or mercury line fluorescent lamps can mess stuff 
> up. But if you avoid the obvious pitfalls then comparison by eye with 
> the original object is OK under real incandescent light or sunlight.
> 
> There are a handful of materials whose colours alter radically depending 
> on the colour temperature of the light that they are seen in didymium 
> glass being one such and the gemstone Alexandrite another. They are 
> unusual in that they have a deep cut notch in their transmission 
> spectrum in the yellow which makes their perceived (and measured) colour 
> vary significantly with the ambient lighting characteristics.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysoberyl#Alexandrite
> 
> Most pigments and dyes used in colour printing avoid having these 
> characteristics to prevent a print from appearing significantly 
> different depending on the colour temperature of the ambient light.
> 
> You still have problems in a mixture of incandescent and daylight though 
> if the proportions vary across the object. Compared to the subjective 
> errors caused by well known optical illusions there is little point in 
> obsessing about total control of everything for one particular lighting 
> situation unless you can control the display environment precisely.
> 

you *can* control the viewing environment an image is "approved" of ...

... WYSIWYG ...

soft proofing from monitor to print in a light box, light room, or 
transparency on light table sometimes involving a loop ... or the 
reverse involving scanning or camera capture

... hard proofing more applicable to prepress...

you sound like you would rather put the emphasis on the hardware, which 
would be "good enough color" with a standard working space like sRGB 
which has proved out for consumer WYSIWYG as in W3C's choice

-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4391

On 8/2/2018 3:48 PM, dale wrote:
> On 8/2/2018 4:54 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 01/08/2018 01:24, Eric Stevens wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 06:01:58 -0700, Savageduck
>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 31, 2018, dale wrote
>>>> (in article <bfm11i.dud.17.2@news.alt.net>):
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/30/2018 9:57 PM, nospam wrote:
>>>>>> In article<bfl4oa.9ei.19.3@news.alt.net>, dale<dale@dalekelly.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> might be a nice feature for Lightroom ... compatible with some
>>>>>>> measurement instruments ... and data like viewing angle, white 
>>>>>>> point, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> lightroom has been fully colour managed since day one.
>>>>>
>>>>> there is a difference between managing color and managing appearance,
>>>>> look up CIECAM02 on wikipedia
>>>>>
>>>>> viewing environment like a light room is one variable in appearance
>>>>
>>>> What exactly do you believe is a *light room*?
>>>>
>>>> Understand that any viewing environment is going to be influenced by 
>>>> amient
>>>> light, regardless of the specific light source be it day light, or 
>>>> any type
>>>> of artificial lighting.
>>>>
>>>> What is your specific, or special purpose/interest for needing this 
>>>> specific
>>>> icc profile for a *light room* (not LR the app)?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn’t sound as though you have any interest in color management 
>>>> for
>>>> photography post processing.
>>>
>>> My impression is quite the contrary. Why else do you need color
>>> management if it is to enable the management and control of the
>>> appearance of the finished print? The process starts with the object,
>>> continues through the camera, the processing in computer (which
>>> includes the screen or monitor), on through the printer and paper and
>>> surely (and this is the subject of the OP's original post) includes
>>> the viewing environment.
>>
>> Provided that the light approximates a blackbody with a characteristic 
>> temperature then the human eye's automatic white balance does a very 
>> good job of removing the orange or blue casts that a camera will 
>> faithfully record (if it is set to record the absolute RGB image). 
>> Remember in the old days of daylight vs artificial light films?
>>
>> You cannot control the lighting environment that prints will be viewed 
>> in and some peaky LED or mercury line fluorescent lamps can mess stuff 
>> up. But if you avoid the obvious pitfalls then comparison by eye with 
>> the original object is OK under real incandescent light or sunlight.
>>
>> There are a handful of materials whose colours alter radically 
>> depending on the colour temperature of the light that they are seen in 
>> didymium glass being one such and the gemstone Alexandrite another. 
>> They are unusual in that they have a deep cut notch in their 
>> transmission spectrum in the yellow which makes their perceived (and 
>> measured) colour vary significantly with the ambient lighting 
>> characteristics.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysoberyl#Alexandrite
>>
>> Most pigments and dyes used in colour printing avoid having these 
>> characteristics to prevent a print from appearing significantly 
>> different depending on the colour temperature of the ambient light.
>>
>> You still have problems in a mixture of incandescent and daylight 
>> though if the proportions vary across the object. Compared to the 
>> subjective errors caused by well known optical illusions there is 
>> little point in obsessing about total control of everything for one 
>> particular lighting situation unless you can control the display 
>> environment precisely.
>>
> 
> you *can* control the viewing environment an image is "approved" of ...
> 
> ... WYSIWYG ...
> 
> soft proofing from monitor to print in a light box, light room, or 
> transparency on light table sometimes involving a loop ... or the 
> reverse involving scanning or camera capture
> 
> ... hard proofing more applicable to prepress...
> 
> you sound like you would rather put the emphasis on the hardware, which 
> would be "good enough color" with a standard working space like sRGB 
> which has proved out for consumer WYSIWYG as in W3C's choice
> 

there are also hoods for monitors ...

-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4371

On Jul 30, 2018, dale wrote
(in article <bfl4oa.9ei.19.3@news.alt.net>):

> On 7/30/2018 8:33 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> > On Jul 30, 2018, Savageduck wrote
> > (in article<0001HW.210FE5460028FC0270000C8932CF@news.giganews.com>):
> >
> > > On Jul 30, 2018, dale wrote
> > > (in article <bfkter.30v.19.1@news.alt.net>):
> > >
> > > > On 7/25/2018 7:38 AM, nospam wrote:
> > > > > In article<bf67c8.j34.17.1@news.alt.net>, dale<dale@dalekelly.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I was wondering if there is a software/instrument to make a profile for
> > > > > > a viewing environment like a light box.
> > > > >
> > > > > there is.
> > > >
> > > > does Adobe "Light Room" do it? A Light room is a viewing environment ...
> > >
> > > Lightroom is not a “viewing environment”, your “viewing
> > > environment”
> > > is the room with whatever lighting is being used in that room, together
> > > with
> > > your display/monito, and whatever software you are using to facilitate
> > > viewing your images. That might well be Lightroom, but that viewing is done
> > > on whichever display/monitor you are using. Ideally you are using a
> > > calibrated display/monitor. That calibration should be done using one of
> > > the
> > > tools available from Datacolor, or X-Rite such as the Spyder5Pro, X-Rite
> > > ColorMunki display, X-Rite i1Display Pro, X-Rite i1Studio
> > > Spectrophotometer,
> > > or any of the tools they offer.
> > >
> > > After display/monitor calibration those tools, and software can generate an
> > > icc profile for the display/monitor, and room lighting which can be applied
> > > via Lightroom, for viewing images under that specific lighting. Some of
> > > these
> > > calibration tools also hgave the capability to adjust calibration according
> > > to changing light in that room.
> > >
> > > Then you have the issue of generating printer/paper icc profiles for
> > > printing, which are quite different to display/monitor calibration
> > > profiles.
> > >
> > > <http://x-rite.com>
> >
> > Try this: <https://www.xrite.com>
> >
> > > <https://www.datacolor.com/photography-design/>
>
> might be a nice feature for Lightroom ... compatible with some
> measurement instruments ... and data like viewing angle, white point, etc.

Those tools have nothing to do with Lightroom, other than generating icc 
profiles which can be use with Lightroom, printers, projectors, etc. The 
important issue is having your display/monitor properly calibrated when used 
under the ambient light in whatever room you use for editing. Without that 
calibration any attempt at color management, regardless of icc profile you 
might have available, will be unsuccessful.

...and then there is your camera, and whatever light conditions, or 
artificial light you might find yourself shooting under.

-- 

Regards,
Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4372

On 7/30/2018 10:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2018, dale wrote
> (in article <bfl4oa.9ei.19.3@news.alt.net>):
> 
>> On 7/30/2018 8:33 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> On Jul 30, 2018, Savageduck wrote
>>> (in article<0001HW.210FE5460028FC0270000C8932CF@news.giganews.com>):
>>>
>>>> On Jul 30, 2018, dale wrote
>>>> (in article <bfkter.30v.19.1@news.alt.net>):
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/25/2018 7:38 AM, nospam wrote:
>>>>>> In article<bf67c8.j34.17.1@news.alt.net>, dale<dale@dalekelly.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was wondering if there is a software/instrument to make a profile for
>>>>>>> a viewing environment like a light box.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> there is.
>>>>>
>>>>> does Adobe "Light Room" do it? A Light room is a viewing environment ...
>>>>
>>>> Lightroom is not a “viewing environment”, your “viewing
>>>> environment”
>>>> is the room with whatever lighting is being used in that room, together
>>>> with
>>>> your display/monito, and whatever software you are using to facilitate
>>>> viewing your images. That might well be Lightroom, but that viewing is done
>>>> on whichever display/monitor you are using. Ideally you are using a
>>>> calibrated display/monitor. That calibration should be done using one of
>>>> the
>>>> tools available from Datacolor, or X-Rite such as the Spyder5Pro, X-Rite
>>>> ColorMunki display, X-Rite i1Display Pro, X-Rite i1Studio
>>>> Spectrophotometer,
>>>> or any of the tools they offer.
>>>>
>>>> After display/monitor calibration those tools, and software can generate an
>>>> icc profile for the display/monitor, and room lighting which can be applied
>>>> via Lightroom, for viewing images under that specific lighting. Some of
>>>> these
>>>> calibration tools also hgave the capability to adjust calibration according
>>>> to changing light in that room.
>>>>
>>>> Then you have the issue of generating printer/paper icc profiles for
>>>> printing, which are quite different to display/monitor calibration
>>>> profiles.
>>>>
>>>> <http://x-rite.com>
>>>
>>> Try this: <https://www.xrite.com>
>>>
>>>> <https://www.datacolor.com/photography-design/>
>>
>> might be a nice feature for Lightroom ... compatible with some
>> measurement instruments ... and data like viewing angle, white point, etc.
> 
> Those tools have nothing to do with Lightroom, other than generating icc
> profiles which can be use with Lightroom, printers, projectors, etc. The
> important issue is having your display/monitor properly calibrated when used
> under the ambient light in whatever room you use for editing. Without that
> calibration any attempt at color management, regardless of icc profile you
> might have available, will be unsuccessful.
> 
> ...and then there is your camera, and whatever light conditions, or
> artificial light you might find yourself shooting under.
> 

there is a difference between managing color and managing appearance, 
look up CIECAM02 on wikipedia

viewing environment like a light room is one variable in appearance

I think ICC considers CIECAM02

-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4366

On 7/30/2018 8:31 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> Lightroom is not a “viewing environment”, your “viewing environment”
> is the room with whatever lighting is being used in that room

couldn't it be configured to profile, and connected to other profiles ?

-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4367

In article <bfl4g4.9ei.19.1@news.alt.net>, dale <dale@dalekelly.org>
wrote:

> > Lightroom is not a ³viewing environment², your ³viewing environment²
> > is the room with whatever lighting is being used in that room
> 
> couldn't it be configured to profile, and connected to other profiles ?

no.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4374

On 7/30/2018 9:46 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <bfl4g4.9ei.19.1@news.alt.net>, dale <dale@dalekelly.org>
> wrote:
> 
>>> Lightroom is not a ³viewing environment², your ³viewing environment²
>>> is the room with whatever lighting is being used in that room
>>
>> couldn't it be configured to profile, and connected to other profiles ?
> 
> no.
> 

what prevents it ?

-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4375

On 7/31/2018 5:52 AM, dale wrote:
>>
> 
> what prevents it 

feature request ?


-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4390

On 7/30/2018 9:46 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <bfl4g4.9ei.19.1@news.alt.net>, dale <dale@dalekelly.org>
> wrote:
> 
>>> Lightroom is not a ³viewing environment², your ³viewing environment²
>>> is the room with whatever lighting is being used in that room
>>
>> couldn't it be configured to profile, and connected to other profiles ?
> 
> no.
> 

<https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/help/print-job-options-settings.html>

Or edit in PS and convert the4 profile.

-- 
PeterN

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4365

In article <bfkter.30v.19.1@news.alt.net>, dale <dale@dalekelly.org>
wrote:

> > 
> >> I was wondering if there is a software/instrument to make a profile for
> >> a viewing environment like a light box.
> > 
> > there is.
> > 
> 
> does Adobe "Light Room" do it? A Light room is a viewing environment ...

lightroom (no space), and no. 

you need a hardware puck and associated software.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4368

On 7/30/2018 9:31 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <bfkter.30v.19.1@news.alt.net>, dale <dale@dalekelly.org>
> wrote:
> 
>>>
>>>> I was wondering if there is a software/instrument to make a profile for
>>>> a viewing environment like a light box.
>>>
>>> there is.
>>>
>>
>> does Adobe "Light Room" do it? A Light room is a viewing environment ...
> 
> lightroom (no space), and no.
> 
> you need a hardware puck and associated software.
> 

the name Lightroom (no space) is kinda' like a room where you have 
specific viewing conditions like the characteristics of the light ?

-- 
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4385

On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 21:31:12 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>In article <bfkter.30v.19.1@news.alt.net>, dale <dale@dalekelly.org>
>wrote:
>
>> > 
>> >> I was wondering if there is a software/instrument to make a profile for
>> >> a viewing environment like a light box.
>> > 
>> > there is.
>> > 
>> 
>> does Adobe "Light Room" do it? A Light room is a viewing environment ...
>
>lightroom (no space), and no. 
>
>you need a hardware puck and associated software.

Hmmm. You (and a few others) don't seem to know where the name
'Lightroom' came from.
-- 

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4387

In article <rjv1mdpmn68qfnvcmr7pqpohsvqnshd9rl@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
<eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> >> >> I was wondering if there is a software/instrument to make a profile for
> >> >> a viewing environment like a light box.
> >> > 
> >> > there is.
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> does Adobe "Light Room" do it? A Light room is a viewing environment ...
> >
> >lightroom (no space), and no. 
> >
> >you need a hardware puck and associated software.
> 
> Hmmm. You (and a few others) don't seem to know where the name
> 'Lightroom' came from.

i know quite well where it came from.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.image.processing

csiph-web