Subject: Re: ACR v3.2 D2x white balance still not correct
Every reference source refers to the “theoretical” material of a perfect black body radiator, the basis of the Kelvin scale. I resent your continuous ad hominem attacks on my intelligence and integrity.
Here are just two references:
The Planckian locus only drags the discussion into more math and terms that need clearer definition for the average reader. The math for this single line has three constants but only one variable (Kelvin). The Wikipedia diagram does show intersecting lines as well. Others such as Answers.Com show only the single locus line.
I don’t believe any of these contradict my description. I was trying to offer some rational as to why different software packages report different numbers. I was not trying to drag the discussion into more technical voodoo. There is enough debate among the true experts already. In fact, Applied Optics discusses at least 10 algorithms and attempts to quantify the errors.
Both of our explanations are simplistic, but thank you for sticking to the facts. I remain un-suprized by the fact that different packages report different Kelvin numbers. I also understand why mixed or artificial light sources (such as fluorescent) cannot be adequately described by a single Kelvin value. Since the CIE defined standard illuminants do imply a spectral distribution, they can.
The Wikipedia article references two of the books I also researched.
All of this is far beyond what the average user needs to achieve good white balance. Unless you get caught up in the numbers themselves.
Cheers, Rags :-)
View All Messages in adobe.photoshop.camera.raw
ACR v3.2 D2x white balance still not correct =>
Copyright © 2006 WatermarkFactory.com. All Rights Reserved.