In a message dated 10/27/00 6:50:45 AM, arew@patrol.i-way.co.uk writes: >> That would be one choice, though it's not a favorite puck of mine... > > > >Knowing your propensity for droll understatement, are you really saying >that > >it's total cr*p? > > > >Please bear in mind that you routinely have the best kit in the world > >available at your fingertips, and have probably got used to this, whereas >I > >don't yet have <any> form of hardware calibrator, so just about anything > >that works ought to be an improvement! Kit like the X-Rite DTP-92 will >have > >to wait until my next upgrade cycle ;-) Its that New England dry sense of humor... made famous by Mark Twain (who wrote all that Mississippi River stuff right here in New England)... Okay, used to be that monitor calibration choices were between big, solid, expensive stuff like the DTP-92 (I can remember when that one cost a thousand bucks) and small, cheap stuff like the Chroma4, which looks like it came as the prize in a CrackerJack box, and has a bad habit of leaving its suction cups on the screen. I've actually seen usres holding a Chroma4 to the screen by hand, as it had no feet left. The thing will fit in a shirt pocket, and is so lightweight you wouldn't notice it was there. So even if it does a pretty good job, it tends not to inspire confidence, and resellers are hesitant to charge hundreds of dollars for it, as it does't seem like much for the money. Enter the Monitor Spyder. This device is solid, effective, fast, the specs rival anything on the market... and its a great looking substantial piece of equipment, actually much more impressive to have around the office that the more expensive pucks. And it costs less than a Chroma4. And it runs OptiCal and PhotoCal, which are the preferred software of most all us color geeks... End of story. C. David Tobie Design Cooperative CDTobie@designcoop.com - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.