Photoline vs. PhotoSlop [Printers]

Prev: Bulk Epson ink available from France?
Next: PhotoSlop Compared to 4 Different Editors

From: LOL! on 6 Feb 2010 09:48

On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:37:47 -0600, LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote:

>
>As any discerning photographer and graphic editor knows, a Granger
>Calibration Chart is perhaps the most useful tool to find any errors in
>their color-space work-path. From camera, to editor, to print. It requires
>that you have an accurate Granger Calibration Chart at your disposal. For
>information on how to create one for your own system, refer to
><http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/test-charts.shtml>
>
>Here's a Granger Calibration Chart created with the tools available in
>Photoline compared to a Granger Calibration Chart created with the tools
>available in PhotoSlop.
>
><http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2780/4333627495_106144740c_o.jpg>
>
>Any questions?
>
>LOL!

Oh this is just getting funnier and funnier...

Here's a Granger Calibration Chart created with the tools in Paint Shop Pro

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4334891542_3f02f3905f_o.jpg

I even went back to see where PhotoSlop's errors were and corrected its
"Rainbow" gradient to have the proper colors and spacings in it, changed
the color profiles, the color-space, I tried everything, and still I
couldn't get PhotoSlop to create a correct Granger Calibration Chart. They
all looked nearly identical to the example previously posted with its
hideous peaks and ravines and large missing ranges of hues.

And then you fools wonder why you spend days and weeks of your lives trying
to properly calibrate your color profiles and monitors, wasting hundreds of
dollars on extra screen and printer calibration tools, reams of expensive
paper, quarts of ink, etc. etc. All because you are depending on an
outrageously overpriced program, Photoslop, that can't even produce the
right colors on your systems. If this isn't a penultimate case of "Garbage
In Garbage Out", I don't know what is!

Too fuckin' funny!

ROFLMAO!

From: LOL! on 6 Feb 2010 11:16

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:55:37 +0000 (UTC), "Anon" <none(a)none.invalid> wrote:

>
>"LOL!" <lol(a)lol.org> wrote in message
>news:jdvqm5h31nn5s0ak33td4jvu4faberln0t(a)4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:37:47 -0600, LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>As any discerning photographer and graphic editor knows, a Granger
>>>Calibration Chart is perhaps the most useful tool to find any errors in
>>>their color-space work-path. From camera, to editor, to print. It requires
>>>that you have an accurate Granger Calibration Chart at your disposal. For
>>>information on how to create one for your own system, refer to
>>><http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/test-charts.shtml>
>>>
>Self-serving promoting his own site deleted...

Couldn't even stand to have the 100% proof listed again, could you. Are you
sticking your head in the sand again, or wherever it is that you keep it
these days? Do you listen to others with your fingers in your ears while
humming a tune? Read facts and evidence while poking your own eyes out?
Seems to be the case. LOL!

What "his own site"? I don't own Flickr, I don't own Photoline, I don't own
PaintShopPro.

>
>Life is linear, film was never linear, and your product isn't going to push
>the industry standard off the hill.
>
>

"If even 5 billion people are saying and believing a foolish thing, it
remains a foolish thing."

LOL!!!!!

From: LOL! on 6 Feb 2010 12:11

On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:16:34 -0600, LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote:

>On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:55:37 +0000 (UTC), "Anon" <none(a)none.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>>"LOL!" <lol(a)lol.org> wrote in message
>>news:jdvqm5h31nn5s0ak33td4jvu4faberln0t(a)4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:37:47 -0600, LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>As any discerning photographer and graphic editor knows, a Granger
>>>>Calibration Chart is perhaps the most useful tool to find any errors in
>>>>their color-space work-path. From camera, to editor, to print. It requires
>>>>that you have an accurate Granger Calibration Chart at your disposal. For
>>>>information on how to create one for your own system, refer to
>>>><http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/test-charts.shtml>
>>>>
>>Self-serving promoting his own site deleted...
>
>Couldn't even stand to have the 100% proof listed again, could you. Are you
>sticking your head in the sand again, or wherever it is that you keep it
>these days? Do you listen to others with your fingers in your ears while
>humming a tune? Read facts and evidence while poking your own eyes out?
>Seems to be the case. LOL!
>
>What "his own site"? I don't own Flickr, I don't own Photoline, I don't own
>PaintShopPro.
>
>>
>>Life is linear, film was never linear, and your product isn't going to push
>>the industry standard off the hill.
>>
>>
>
>"If even 5 billion people are saying and believing a foolish thing, it
>remains a foolish thing."
>
>LOL!!!!!

Here's another Granger Chart. This time created with an even more dedicated
and older "industry standard" than PhotoSlop, "Canvas". Used for decades by
designers and publishers for the most exacting desk-top-publishing projects
and technical drawings. It can even create maps down to finer than 1mm
precision in relation to GIS world-map coordinates. I'm not overly familiar
with its JPG compression settings so this resulting file ended up being
compressed greatly, but it still clearly shows the original file being an
accurate Granger Calibration Chart.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2686/4335191188_7aa237fe34_o.jpg

I'll bet you can grab any editor on the planet that allows you to use
gradients, layers, and the proper layer blend modes and it'll still produce
a correct Granger Chart, EXCEPT for PhotoSlop.

I encourage all of you to use your favorite editor as well as any lesser
known editors that you might happen to have installed and use them to
create Granger Charts. Then compare it to the garbage that PhotoSlop spits
out. Post your findings. It would be very interesting. I can't prove it to
the doubters with my samples, you'll claim I didn't use the programs I
claimed to use. You can only prove it to yourself.

Why is it that the only "industry standard" that CANNOT create a proper
Granger Calibration Chart is Photoslop?

LOL!

From: tony cooper on 6 Feb 2010 12:22

From: LOL! on 6 Feb 2010 12:40

On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:22:37 -0500, tony cooper
<tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:16:34 -0600, LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:55:37 +0000 (UTC), "Anon" <none(a)none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"LOL!" <lol(a)lol.org> wrote in message
>>>news:jdvqm5h31nn5s0ak33td4jvu4faberln0t(a)4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:37:47 -0600, LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>As any discerning photographer and graphic editor knows, a Granger
>>>>>Calibration Chart is perhaps the most useful tool to find any errors in
>>>>>their color-space work-path. From camera, to editor, to print. It requires
>>>>>that you have an accurate Granger Calibration Chart at your disposal. For
>>>>>information on how to create one for your own system, refer to
>>>>><http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/test-charts.shtml>
>>>>>
>>>Self-serving promoting his own site deleted...
>>
>>Couldn't even stand to have the 100% proof listed again, could you. Are you
>>sticking your head in the sand again, or wherever it is that you keep it
>>these days? Do you listen to others with your fingers in your ears while
>>humming a tune? Read facts and evidence while poking your own eyes out?
>>Seems to be the case. LOL!
>>
>>What "his own site"? I don't own Flickr, I don't own Photoline, I don't own
>>PaintShopPro.
>>
>Or even a camera, for that matter.

Awww... whatsamatter Boopy? Is the harsh truth about your favorite software
that you've been schilling to everyone all your life got you down? Or was
it all that money and time that you wasted on it?

LOL!

| Next | Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Bulk Epson ink available from France?
Next: PhotoSlop Compared to 4 Different Editors