Calibration quality

hi,
I am doing a calibration process for that i maintain
1) Equipment .
2) Maintaina a inspection plan and put the task type group .
3) shedule the maintenance plan.
then i create a maintenance order (IW31) to that equipment and maintain the settelment rule
then it show me an error "No insp. lot was generated Release order anyway?"
(Note:-when i relese the shedule maintainence plan and release call IL is generated but not at the time of maintainece order creation )
Please suggest how the inspection lot get generated at the time of release maintenance order
Maashish

Dear Seth
please check the following
1) You have used QM control key in the task list
2) create a sampling proceudre which has plant maintenece tick in tht
Regards
Gajesh

Similar Messages

Gradient Problems with colours

Hi I am new to Illustrator (just bought CS5) and I am having trouble with the colours when using gradients (colours are generally duller as well) but when I make a gradient from red to black the computer automatically puts a grey inbetween, (photoshop has no problems the colours are clear and bright) I recently did a tutorial http://veerle.duoh.com/design/article/illustrator_inset_effect_on_text_in_combination_with _clipping_mask (she had the same tutorial in photoshop, which worked great) but my colours in illustrator are having this grey issue and the image came out looking very dull.
Is there some file setting I may have changed to cause this?
Thank you

The color setup in AI is trying to simulate the way CMYK actually looks in print. Sometimes the simulated display goes overboard, and it's impractical to write you a textbook on the whole color management (color calibration) subject in a user forum. (Plus, replies in a user forum are as often wrong as right.) There is plenty of reading material out there for you on this. (Start with the Help files, as the Color Settings dialog suggests.)
When designing for CMYK print, work in a CMYK document. Switching color modes is bad practice, especially if you intend for your on-press values to actually be the values you specify in the document. For example:
1. Set up your red (100M, 100Y) to black (100K) grad.
2. Change Document Color Mode to RGB.
3. Change Document Color Mode to CMYK.
4. Look at what has happened to your original CMYK values.
The best way to work in CMYK is to have a basic understanding of CMYK and the real-world principles of process printing. For example, if you do as Jacob suggests, and make the black end of your grad also contain the "red" (100M, 100Y), you will have a 300% total ink coverage at that end of your grad. That may or may not be a problem, depending on the target printing environment.
Generally speaking, yes; CMYK print is almost always "dull" compared to viewing RGB on a monitor (and you are always viewing RGB on a monitor, even if it is shifted to simulate CMYK). This is true regardless of color calibration. Common sense goes a long way. Monitors glow; paper doesn't.
One of the most overlooked facts is that human vision is highly adaptive. Even in RGB, your monitor never displays anything even approaching a true black. Yet your eye nonetheless sees a dark rich black.
CMYK process, for example, is very poor at reproducing brilliant blues. Yet the combination of knowledgeable image color correction (as opposed to mere calibration), quality printing, and the adaptive nature of human vision can nonetheless result in printed blues that seem to "glow."
If you're designing for commercial print, you should seek to understand the process enough that you would be comfortable assigning colors while working on a grayscale monitor. Again, that comes from both study and real-world exposure. Actually visit the press room whenever you have the opportunity. Maybe even take a course in commercial repro at the local tech school. You can't really gain the understanding you need in a software user forum. This is a huge subject.
JET

DVD+R and DVD-R 101: An Explanation for Beginners

I found this information and believe that it could be of help to other beginners like me. I Googled: DVD-R vs DVD+R ?
There are other sites, but here is one which explains step-by-step. Titled:
*DVD+R and DVD-R 101: An Explanation for Beginners*
Here:http://netforbeginners.about.com/cs/multimedia/a/DVD_explained.htm
~L

I only use DVD+R (using iMovie 06 and iDVD 09).
I have found DVD+R to be more reliable than DVD-R. The only disadvantage to DVD+R is that DVD players manufacture before 2003 may not play them.
DVD-R is not as good as DVD+R for three reasons: inferior error correction, inferior ‘wobble’ tracking, and the fact its data writing methods look like an un-needed halfway point between CD-R and DVD+R.
For a DVD burner to track where it is on the disc, it uses three things: the ‘wobble’ of the data track (where it actually wobbles back and forth instead of in a straight line) to tell where it is in the track, the position of the track to tell where it is on the disc, and some additional information on the disc to tell where the track begins and ends.
On DVD-R, they tried to solve the problem with something called ‘pre-pits’ where spikes in the amplitude of the wobble appear due to pits fully out of phase with the rest of the track (ie, between two spirals of the track, where there is no data). This can be viewed as a simple improvement over CD-R as it makes it easier to track the wobble.
On a DVD+R, however, they came up with a much better method. Instead of changing the frequency of the wobble, or causing amplitude spikes in the wobble, they use complete phase changes. Where CD-R’s and DVD-R’s methods make you choose between either easy wobble tracking or easy ATIP reading, DVD+R’s method makes it very easy to track the wobble, and also very easy to encode data into the wobble.
Now, the third item on the list: how DVD+R discs burn better. The ATIP/pre-pit/ADIP stores information about optimum power control settings. This information is basically formulas stating how much output power is needed, what the laser startup power should be, and other pieces of information you require to properly burn a DVD.
In addition to the optimum power control profiles, DVD+R also gives four times more scratch space for the drive to calibrate the laser on; more space can only improve the calibration quality. So, in short, DVD+R media exists to simply produce better burns and protect your Movie.

Calibrating: Improve the quality and accuracy of your images

The Sprout Workspace depends on the alignment of the HP Touch Mat and the projected screen on the touch mat.
This alignment is calibrated during initial setup and can also be recalibrated at any time you choose.
During calibration, Sprout detects the alignment of the touch mat and adjusts the projector and cameras to create the best results. Calibration can be done from the Sprout Workspace or from the Windows Control Panel.
Make sure that Sprout is on a level surface to successfully calibrate the product.
You can check out Calibrating the Sprout by HP to read more about this function.
Here are some tips to help you get the best image capture quality:
Make sure the touch mat is flat, plugged in, and clear of any objects.
Place the object for capture in the middle of the touch mat.
Don’t touch the mat during capture.
For best capture, objects should be less than 6 inches (15.24 cm) tall.
Perform a recalibration (calibrating Sprout aligns the touch mat and the projector).
Shut down other applications.
Turn off the lights in the room, or darken the room as much as possible.
I work for HP, supporting the HP Experts who volunteer their time and technical knowledge to help others.

There's another HP document about calibrating for 3D scanning with your Sprout.
Sprout by HP - Calibrating for 3D Scanning on Sprout by HP
You might want to take a look at this one too!
Thanks,
GeorgeFN
I work on behalf of HP.

Colour Calibration / White Point setting - Is Imac Display really professional quality

I am trying to calibrate my imac 27" using i1 Display2 calibration software. I am trying to set a traget of 6500 using the software but it advises the current is only 5600 and suggests moving the RGB sliders to get this current white point up to my 6500 target. Unfortunatly i have no idea where i find these sliders on my imac. Can anyone advise how i change my current white point to get to the 6500 target?
Also, on the brightness issue, does shades work to reduce my brightness or will it simply interfere with my colour calibration?
Finally, i was going to use my iMac for professional photography. (Mainly on line but some print work required). Honestly, is the iMac display up to the job or should i consider changing
Thanks
Gary

Corbybhy, the glossy screen is the biggest and silliest myth out there. Really.
I have been a professional art director & designer for over 26 years, and by the way, for many years my high end professional CRTS were made of glass (and glossy). Another myth is that the screens cannot be calibrated, and are too bright. Hogwash. I use Spyder3Pro and have had few problems, guessing your device will be the same. Actually, the monitors seem to stay consistant for a heck of a lot longer than the old high end CRTs did. In the old days, most professionals calibrated to 5000k, but these days 6500k is the standard.
The amount of MISINFORMATION that is being spewed always amazes me. If you can keep your lighting consistant and somewhat dim, your life will be easier. Reflections are simply not a major issue, and are also overblown as a issue (by the way, my iMac sits next to a window, I just use shades to dim the ambient light).
I work mostly in print, and produce mostly publications, advertising & marketing materials. I have ZERO issues with my screen matching my proofs. ZERO. I do a huge amount of imaging, retouching & post-processing... all from my 27" iMac.

PXI 2527 & PXI 4071 -Questions about EMF considerations for high accuracy measurements and EMF calibration schemes?

Hi!
I need to perform an in-depth analysis of the overall system accuracy for a proposed system. I'm well underway using the extensive documentation in the start-menu National Instruments\NI-DMM\ and ..\NI-Switch\ Documenation folders...
While typing the question, I think I partially answered myself while cross-referencing NI documents... However a couple of questions remain:
If I connect a DMM to a 2 by X arranged switch/mux, each DMM probe will see twice the listed internal "Differential thermal EMF" at a typical value of 2.5uV and a max value of less than 12uV (per relay). So the total effect on the DMM uncertainty caused by the switch EMF would be 2*2.5uV = 5uV? Or should these be added as RSS: = sqrt(2.5^2+2.5^2) since you can not know if the two relays have the same emf?
Is there anything that can be done to characterize or account for this EMF (software cal, etc?)?
For example, assuming the following:
* Instruments and standards are powered on for several hours to allow thermal stability inside of the rack and enclosures
* temperature in room outside of rack is constant
Is there a reliable way of measureing/zeroing the effect of system emf? Could this be done by applying a high quality, low emf short at the point where the DUT would normally be located, followed by a series of long-aperture voltage average measurements at the lowest DMM range, where the end result (say (+)8.9....uV) could be taken as a system calibration constant accurate to the spec's of the DMM?
What would the accuracy of the 4071 DMM be, can I calculate it as follows, using 8.9uV +-700.16nV using 90 days and 8.9uV +- 700.16nV + 150nV due to "Additional noise error" assuming integration time of 1 (aperture) for ease of reading the chart, and a multiplier of 15 for the 100mV range. (Is this equivalent to averaging a reading of 1 aperture 100 times?)
So, given the above assumptions, would it be correct to say that I could characterize the system EMF to within 8.5uV+- [700.16nV (DMM cal data) + 0.025ppm*15 (RMS noise, assuming aperture time of 100*100ms = 10s)] = +-[700.16nV+37.5nV] = +- 737.66nV? Or should the ppm accuracy uncertainties be RSS as such: 8.5uV +- sqrt[700.16nV^2 + 37.5nV^2] = 8.5uV +-701.16nV??
As evident by my above line of thought, I am not at all sure how to properly sum the uncertainties (I think you always do RSS for uncertainties from different sources?) and more importantly, how to read and use the graph/table in the NI 4071 Specifications.pdf on page 3. What exactly does it entail to have an integration time larger than 1? Should I adjust the aperture time or would it be more accurate to just leave aperture at default (100ms for current range) and just average multiple readings, say average 10 to get a 10x aperture equivalent?
The below text includes what was going to be the post until I think I answered myself. I left it in as it is relevant to the problem above and includes what I hope to be correct statements. If you are tired of reading now, just stop, if you are bored, feel free to comment on the below section as well.
The problem I have is one of fully understanding part of this documenation. In particular, since a relay consists of (at least) 2 dissimilar metal junctions (as mentioned in the NI Switch help\Fundamentals\General Switching Considerations\Thermal EMF and Offset Voltage section) and because of the thermo-couple effect (Seebeck voltage), it seems that there would be an offset voltage generated inside each of the relays at the point of the junction. It refeers the "Thermocouple Measurements" section (in the same help document) for further details, but this is where my confusion starts to creep up.
In equation (1) it gives the expression for determining E_EMF which for my application is what I care about, I think (see below for details on my application).
What confuses me is this: If my goal is to, as accurately as possible, determine the overall uncertainty in a system consisting of a DMM and a Switch module, do I use the "Differential thermal EMF" as found in the switch data-sheet, or do I need to try and estimate temperatures in the switch and use the equation?
*MY answer to my own question:
By carefully re-reading the example in the thermocouple section of the switch, I realized that they calculate 2 EMF's, one for the internal switch, calculated as 2.5uV (given in the spec sheet of the switch as the typical value) and one for the actual thermocouple. I say actual, because I think my initial confusion stems from the fact that the documenation talks about the relay/switch junctions as thermocouples in one section, and then talks about an external "probe" thermocouple in the next and I got them confused.
As such, if I can ensure low temperatures inside the switch at the location of the junctions (by adequate ventilation and powering down latching relays), I should be able to use 2.5uV as my EMF from the switch module, or to be conservative, <12uV max (from data sheet of 2527 again).
I guess now I have a hard time believeing the 2.5uV typical value listed.. They say the junctions in the relays are typically an iron-nickel alloy against a copper-alloy. Well, those combinations are not explicitly listed in the documenation table for Seebeck coefficients, but even a very small value, like 0.3uV/C adds up to 7.5uV at 25degC. I'm thinking maybe the table values in the NI documentation reffers to the Seebeck values at 25C?
Project Engineer
LabVIEW 2009
Run LabVIEW on WinXP and Vista system.
Used LabVIEW since May 2005
Certifications: CLD and CPI certified
Currently employed.

Seebeck EMV needs temperature gradients , in your relays you hopefully have low temperature gradients ... however in a switching contact you can have all kind diffusions and 'funny' effects, keeping them on same temperature is the best you can do.
Since you work with a multiplexer and with TCs, you need a good Cold junction ( for serious calibrations at 0°C ) and there is the good place for your short cut to measure the zero EMV. Another good test is loop the 'hot junction' back to the cold junction and observe the residual EMV. Touching (or heating/cooling) the TC loop gives another number for the uncertainty calculation: the inhomogeneous material of the TC itself..
A good source for TC knowledge:
Manual on the use of thermocouples in temperature measurement,
ASTM PCN: 28-012093-40,
ISBN 0-8031-1466-4
(Page1): 'Regardless
of how many facts are presented herein and regardless of the percentage
retained,
all will be for naught unless one simple important fact is
kept firmly in mind.
The thermocouple reports only what it "feels."
This may or may not the temperature of interest'
Message Edited by Henrik Volkers on 04-27-2009 09:36 AM
Greetings from Germany
Henrik
LV since v3.1
“ground” is a convenient fantasy
'˙˙˙˙uıɐƃɐ lɐıp puɐ °06 ǝuoɥd ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ ǝsɐǝld 'ʎɹɐuıƃɐɯı sı pǝlɐıp ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ɹǝqɯnu ǝɥʇ'

Print quality problem with Officejet Pro K5400

I purchased the above printer on August 8th of this year and I have really liked it until now. The print quality has gone to ----! I have done a chat with a technician, replaced any of the cartridges that might be low and it is worse than ever. Two thirds of the page will print okay and then the last third is either blank or very poor quality. I have tried changing the print quality from draft to best and it doesn't help. What recourse do I have? I can't find a real person to talk to.
Does anyone out there have an answer?

I purchased my Pro K5400 in May 2008. In the beginning it was loud (still is) but the printing was beautiful. Over the last three months the color printing is really bad. I've replaced the cartridges with only HP ink, I've aligned printheads, I've cleaned printheads, I've calibrated the linefeed. The diagnostic suggests I replace the printheads. Really? After less than a year? It also sporadically feeds several pages at once. And, I do a lot of printing of claim forms, it arbitrarily expands the left margin. Oh, it also jams often. Again, I believe these last two are due to a feeding problem. I sent an online question and got answers back in somewhat broken English that seem hooked on just replacing the ink and cleaning the printheads. Also, they gave me directions on how to clear a jam. This I know as I clear jams all the time in this printer. They are unable (perhaps due to language barrier) to answer the feeding/jamming problems. I really see this as just a very bad quality printer. I've owned other HPs and never had problems like this. What is the best way to contact someone in the United States about this printer?

Queries related to calibration inspection process

I have some queries related to calibration business process.They are as follows:-
1.Which equipment category do we choose, Q or P?
2.While creating a maintenance plan,which category do we choose, maintenance order or quality maintenance order?
3.Is it that we can't do a time confirmation before results recording?If I try to do so,I get this message"No open operation recieving confirmation entries for order".
4.While I create my maintenance plan,I get this message, a counter could not be defined for the reference object.Why so?
5.After usage decision,if I lock my equipment for further use,the equipment has the status both AVLB and NPRT.Why?
6.Can I create my calibration order manually and assign equipment task list.If so,how?
7.While creating my test equipment,for the PRT tab,the task list usage becomes a mandatory field.What setting is done for this task list usage to become a mandatory field?
Edited by: Pallavi Kakoti on Feb 2, 2012 8:19 AM

Hi
1.Which equipment category do we choose, Q or P?
Ans:
Q is normaly used for Instruments,Lab equipments
P also used for Production/process related equipments needs calibrations often
2.While creating a maintenance plan,which category do we choose, maintenance order or quality maintenance order?
Ans:
Its all depends on config you have did. if Quality maintenance order should be linked to inspection type.can be used.
we can not used maintenance order if it is not linked to inspection type 14.
3.Is it that we can't do a time confirmation before results recording?If I try to do so,I get this message"No open operation recieving confirmation entries for order".
Ans:
You can do time confirmation after result recording, then UD.after UD ,order will be TECOed automaticlay.
4.While I create my maintenance plan,I get this message, a counter could not be defined for the reference object.Why so?
Ans:
Check any measuring counters created for the equipments,
5.After usage decision,if I lock my equipment for further use,the equipment has the status both AVLB and NPRT.Why?
Ans:
After UD, system changes the status NPRT for the equipments have PRT view only.
if PRT view maintained in the equipment, system status remains AVLB.
If you dont to use the equipment after UD-Reject,have to go development using user status.
6.Can I create my calibration order manually and assign equipment task list.If so,how?
Ans:
Yes. you can
Create task list with 300 inspection point, assign when u create order
also you can have manual call in the maintenance plans.

Burning Problem - Power calibration error

hi...
i use dvd studio pro 3.02 and now when i try burning the DVD my laptop the error message appears.
"The recording device reported the media error: Power calibration area error. (0x73, 0x03.)"
i doubt it but is there anyway i can fix that?

Hi
You have two things to check:
- Try a different media. Check this site about * about quality media *.
- Try creating a disc image in your hard drive and burning it with Disk Utility and/or Toast. Check thsi tutorial: * Creating Disc Image in DVDSP *
Hope that helps !
Alberto

How do you retain the quality of Canon HD DSLR files?

     There is a noticeable loss of contrast (and color) when Canon 1D DSLR 1280x720 60fps files are loaded into Premiere Pro CS6, (by me). Many different project settings give this same result. Whether New Sequence - Project settings are Canon XF MPEG2, Digital SLR, AVCHD, or XD CAM HD422, I get nearly the same, (or identical) results. Changing New Sequence>Settings to enable Maximum Bit Depth and Maximum Rendering Quality, made no difference for me.
(NOTE - Edit>Preferences>Memory>Optimize Rendering for 'memory' was selected and the program restarted, before enabling Maximum Rendering Quality).
     Comparing source files played in Windows Media Player, VLC player, and Canon Zoom Browser, all showed higher contrast than in Premiere Pro: toggling between the different windows. Comparing identical frame screen captures from Premiere Pro CS6 (bitmap) and Canon Zoom Browser (jpeg-highest quality) showed the same results. At full zoom in Photoshop CS4, certain pixels showed near posterization in the Premiere screen shot. It seemed that gray tones of medium brightness were affected most.
     The Canon 1d DSLR stores files as a .MOV type, but I don't think Premiere considers this when loading source files. I don't own the Quicktime program.
     I don't have a CUDA graphics card, but I thought that this card was not supposed to affect file coding or de-coding, according to the Video2Brain hardware optimization tutorials. Although it might have been that read and write TIMES were unaffected. These tutorials covered a LOT of (good) material. My notes say that CUDA cards most affect scaling, blending, 'effects' operations, color corrections, and framing. Also, by setting New Sequence>Settings> to optimize rendering, I think I should have got results similar to a CUDA card.
     For me, the loss of contrast (and color) is a significant loss of image quality. You get the same results from a dirty lens, or shooting through an unfocused obstacle. I would appreciate any help in this matter.

     Thanks John T. Smith, using the Video2Brain tutorial method got me a sequence format of AVC-Intra 100 720 60p, which is one I had not tried before. I believe this format will give me the highest quality video for Canon 1D M4 1280x720 files.
     What I see as far as contrast is very close to what I saw before. Whether the contrast I see is good or bad depends both on personal opinion and monitor charactoristics; mainly the type of monitor and how the monitor is calibrated. Yes I still see lower contrast in the Premiere video, compared to how its displayed in VLC, Windows Media Player and Canon Zoom Browser. Based on my Photoshop experience the Premiere video seems to be going through some kind of low-pass filter. Yes the contrast is less, but the noise is less as well. How would the Premiere video look after adjustment layers, or Shadow highlight combined with resharpening I cannot say.   It might look good to me and bad to someone else or vise versa. What I can say for certain in my mind, is that the Premiere video seems to go through some kind of low pass filtering compared to little or no low pass filtering for what you see in the other 3 programs. And based on my personal habits, I would probably be tempted at this point to adjust that low pass filter in some way. However, it seems that standard practice would be to apply adjustment layers, etc as I mentioned before. I'll reserve my opinion for now.

Image Quality of Lightroom vs Nikon Image Processing Software

Is anyone out there of the opinion that the quality of images displayed in Lightroom is not as good as when using Nikon's software (for NEF jpeg files)? I am working with some photographers who think so. I love using lightroom and trying to determine if 1)if there is any legitimacy to there opinions, 2) if any others are experiencing the same thing, and 3) if true, how come?

It's not the monitor calibration that makes the difference, it's the way the RAW engine cooks the image. The calibration mentioned above is meant to mean using the Camera Calibration panel and to tweak the colors to match. I posted a thread a week or so ago, about how I managed to match (to my tastes) the look produced by CaptureNX within Lightroom. Hope this is useful in some way.
http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc80a90/0

Camera Raw Camera Calibration Tab and 5D Mark III

I don't think that many people do this in camera raw, but it was kind of an important step in my workflow with the Canon 7D before and is just not working the same way with the 5D Mark III now.
In the Camera Calibration Tab (Third from the right side) I always changed Camera Profile from Adobe Standard to Camera Standard or Camera Portrait. This step made the image automatically look better, contrast was better and the highlights look a lot better that way. Of course the "Camera Portrait" option makes the image a lil bit red, like the Picture Style in the camera does. But it was an easy adjustment with the Hue Slider of the Red Channel. Like I already said - really great improvement of the image on the 7D raw files, beautiful highlights, shiny, contrasty and so on... Same stuff worked with 5D Mark II perfectly, too.
Now with the 5D Mark III the "Camera Portrait" option, my favourite one, gets me pretty bad results. The Image is too strong oversaturated, too much red in the skintones and in the shadows, too! Shadow contrast gets worse and I can't control this settings the way I did before with the hue/saturation sliders of the channels. It's too extreme red or it's too yellow, but not something right between this extremes. And the highlights get some green tint, so it's no real optimization of the image overall quality at all, like with the other cameras. I don't know if the support of the 5DMIII is still not up to date... It is not only my camera, I also have asked other photographers with a 5D Mark III and they have the same issues changing the camera profile. Lightroom has exactly the same effect... It would be great, if an Adobe Employee can forward this issues, so that it gets tweaked with the further updates and 5dm3 will work the same way in camera raw like mark 2 or 7D.
Sorry for my bad english

Yes, white balance is another possible reason for mismatch
These rules apply:
- if you use white balance "as shot", then white balance in ACR will be the same as from camera or DPP (in a sense - what is white color in ACR will be white in DPP also). However, color temperature/tint shown in ACR will be probably slightly different than value recorded in exif of jpeg or raw file. It's because in that case, whitebalancing is performed using some metadata in raw file by both ACR or DPP, while temperature displayed in ACR is calculated from that metadat using color matrices in selected profile, according to a formula from one book (as documented in dng sdk), while DPP is probably using some other formula or slightly different color matrices
- the same will happen if you use WB dropper on exactly the same position in the photo by both ACR and DPP
- but, if you use the same temperature preset in ACR and DPP (for instance 5200 K), then white in ACR and DPP will probably be a bit different, because whitebalancing is performed in oposite direction now (ACR calculates RGB multipliers from that temperature and using color matrices in the profile)
I hope this was understandable, although it's a bit complicated

VISTA color management and monitor calibration

Elements 7.0
VISTA Home Premium SP1
Nvidia 8600
Samsung SyncMaster 213T
Canon XSi
Multiple printers
Since getting new system with Vista, I haven't been able to get a print that looks like my screen. I tried Costco today and everything was much darker than I expected, but the reds were much richer. I read a lot about calibrating my monitor, but it is possible that there is more do it than that? Learning to adjust skin tone etc. in Photoshop, only to have the prints look bad is pretty frustrating.
Is the other option to invest in a quality printer, or go to a real lab instead of Costco?
Please use small words, since I'm not a professional.
Regards,
Michael

Michael, color management is certainly a difficult issue to perfect. My monitor is color calibrated but it doesn't guarantee that the prints will match. With the same image, I get different results from different printers and labs. I get the best results from labs in the local camera/photo shops, and the pricing for enlargements is still on par with like Snapfish or Kodak.
Check this setting in PSE: Edit>Color Settings...>Always Optimize for Printing. I would suggest color calibrating your monitor, then try different labs until you find the best results.

How much do you care about sound quality in your Home Theater?

Many people sweat over the smallest details when getting a video device (TV, projector), but do not think much about the integration of a sound system in their room. Too many people think that a large TV with an off the shelf sound system will make a great home theater system. Unfortunately, many stores can't even demonstrate the integration of video and audio as evidenced by the huge wall of TVs and a small section devoted to surround sound systems. How is a consumer to build a home theater if you can't hear and see what is possible.
So my question is, how much do you care about sound quality and what have you done to get the most out of your system? For instance: Have you applied sound absorption materials to your walls, have you sweated speaker placement, have you plotted your room's anti-nodes, have you controlled your light levels, have you calibrated your speakers, etc.
Believe it or not, your room's acoustics and the proper type of audio equipment and speakers play a much LARGER part in your enjoyment of anything that you watch. You just can't throw some speakers into a room wherever you want and expect to have an engrossing experience.
The reason I ask is that I don't believe that many people care about sound quality since a large percentage of the population think that portable digital audio players sound fine. I would like to be proven wrong. My other goal is to raise everyone's awareness that you need to think about more than just a large TV in order to build your home theater.
I do not work for Best Buy and am not affiliated with them in any way. I like HT and want to help people improve their HT experience. "There is a LOT more than just having a TV to make a home theater"

It really depends - I am working since the last 2 years on an very large Applet (~650 classes / 1.5mb classes) which had design-time comptibility with MSJVM and Netscape-1.1.5.
Now 2 years later the applet is still not finished although I am pretty sure we would already be shipping if only our managers would not had been that stupid to decide 2 years back to support obsolte jvms.
Since Netscape-4.x is dead and MSJVM useage really decreases dramatically (I guess it won't play a role in 2-3 years) I only can recommend to not target to the msjvm any more.
its really ugly and its buggy, whereever you look bugs, bugs, bugs.
lg Clemens

MPEG-2 quality played on a monitor

Hi,
I have burnt a DVD using Encore 1.0. When the files are exported from Encore into a folder on the harddrive all the files including the VOB and IFO files all look fine and as they should do.
However when I burn exactly the same project onto an actual DVD the VOP file looks as it should but the IFO files look washed out, with the blacks being too light. This is the case when played on a computer monitor.
Unfortunately I'm not able to test it on a TV screen but I have heard that the quality for DVD MPEG-2s does not look correct when played on a computer.
Does anyone know if this is true and if it is the norm. If this is the case does anyone know of any way around this so that it can play properly on a monitor?
Any ideas would be appreciated.
Thanks

The monitor isn't calibrated. What I meant by the VOB and IFO files is that when I play the video from the VOB file it looks as it should however if I play the video from the IFO file it looks washed out.
If it is a problem with the IRE levels shouldn't it look incorrect on all the files and look incorrect when the original MPEG-2 is rendered and not just from the IFO playback.
Also, before I outputted the MPEG-2 from after effects I set the levels to 16-235. Does that mean that the IFO files make it play from 16-235? Is there not a way to make it look correct for playback on both TV screen and monitor?
Thanks

Calibration quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for