|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
> ... We supply contract proofs from > Epson 4800s, driven by EFI rips and set up to emulate average sheet and web > conditions and have no problems getting reasonable matches to our proofs. > Some of our major print vendors have no need for color bars while others > insist on them. Any thoughts? A proof without 'some' colorbar is like a morning without sun or ice cream without the cherry or a monitor without calibration or...you get the picture. It's one thing to pass proofs around for color but I alwas felt it is the duty of whomever produces the proof to accompany it with some sort of visual reference. How are color bars ever consumed or used up in practice varies as widely as there are people looking at proofs in this industry! Some swear by them and many plain ignore them, often out of 'ignorance' -- sorry for the pun. Take the latest ISO-12747 color bar (I'm quoting the number from memory?). If everyone in the industry started using this color bar in proofing, well, printing would be a better place to be in, all of a sudden. Because that would give us some common basis of comparison. I'm not downgrading the FOGRA MedienWedge, here, by the way, just because I mention ISO-12747. The MedienWedge, too, has acquired the status of an 'industry standard' over the recent years. So, in my view, be it the MedienWedge or the latest ISO-12747, co-developped with IDEAlliance and ISO, I'm told, some kind of control strip should accompany each proof. I feel very strongly about that. Not doing it amounts to short-changing industry participants down the stream. Last but not least, in my opinion, some mention on the control strip should say something about the 'intent' of the bar. We have to acknowledge that some proofing may strive to achieve exacting colorimetry on the proof, like ISO-12647-x or SWOP2006_Cx or GRACoL_x. In those instances, the measurement of the control strip will tell the initiated user what is the degree of conformance of the proof to the standard or specification in question. But some proofing systems may only strive for a degree of repeatability. Meaning, the bar is placed for no particular reason other than to serve as some (visual or quantitative) reference that proofing is consistent and to detect wild or spurious fluctuations like a clogged injket head that, otherwise, may very well go undetected. That's a very different aproach to proofing, in my view. Here, there is no commitment, per se, no overt adherance to some specifications. That's why I argue that, in an 'ideal' world, there should be some mention of the intent of the control strip accompanying the strip itself. Something like " this proof is within 1.2 DeltaE of FOGRA39L or GRACoL7 or SWOP2006C3. Roger Breton _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
Visit the Apple Store online or at retail locations.
Copyright © 2011 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.