Talk:D65
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Subscript?
I finally found it in amazon's search; the Schanda ref obviously just made an error in typesetting a table, as that's the only place where D65 is written with subscripted 65. So let's leave it out, OK? Dicklyon (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
...but it's not the only place. In Chapter 2, page 17 you can find:
Perhaps, though, the CIE should have heeded Guild’s warning when the new daylight distribution D65 was defined in 1964 by its spectral power distribution. When samples which fluoresce have to be measured, we often need a laboratory source which simulates D65, but none is available which exactly reproduces its spectral distribution. It might have been better to have developed a source that simulated the D65 distribution closely enough for most practical purposes and to have adopted that source as the standard, with its energy distribution being given as a supplement to the definition.
Looking at other authors: "…CIE Standard Illuminant D65…, "The CIE D illuminants are properly denoted with a two-digit subscript."