RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB"

["shAf" <michael@shaffer.net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 5:23 AM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB"
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:15:35 -0800  shAf
> (michael@shaffer.net) wrote:
>
> >  but while we all recognize with kudos the
> > advantages of VS, we need to also recognize its
> > weakness and lack of scanner characterization.
>
> Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived
> from empirical testing of each scanner supported,
> though this is presumably not the case for scanners
> which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI
> commands for another model.
> ...

        I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression
he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to
claim some scanners are not characterized.  For example, did he take
the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a
single day??  If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to
belong to the device, this is important to know.

        I need to play with this option ... I simply opened VS yesterday to
inspect the help file and look and feel of the v.7 GUI.  If I catch
the gist of current users of this option, I may well end up in the
color space I want by "assigning" the 3-D LUT profile upon opening ...
altho it would have been better to go straight to it via a "color
space = 'none'" option so I could take advantage of IR cleaning.

        I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM
versus another more rigorous ... still, I rather know for sure because
I'm otherwise inadequately evaluating how well it works in monitor
space (as it is presented in Photoshop).  I'll see if he hasn't
responded to a similar query at the comp.periphs.scanners newsgroup.
(... nope ...)

shAf  :o)