Re: ps6: new user
Re: ps6: new user
- Subject: Re: ps6: new user
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:07:40 EST
In a message dated 2/19/01 10:17:16 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
This is interesting and the first I've heard confirmation of some
observations
>
I've made about softproofing in PS6. Generally I've found the
>
softproofing
>
results unsatisfactory when using either white or black ink settings for
>
>
brighter prints such as Lightjet 5000 or Fujix. The white ink setting causes
>
the whites to look too dark (I've heard this is because this was implemented
>
with absolute colorimetric intent) while the black ink setting really washes
>
out the shadows. It is a very different rendering from using separation
>
tables
>
in PS5 (expected) or using the preview button in Convert to Profile
>
(unexpected -
>
shouldn't this be the same as using the softproof option?).
I find that using the absolute colorimetric return (ink and paper checkboxes)
for LightJet or Fujix output is unacceptable, unless editing of the return
table white and black points is performed in building the profile. But these
devices hardly need absolute proofing to begin with , so its not a big issue.
>
>
I did a test where I printed a 21 step grayscale and took a screen shot
>
of it
>
with and without the softproof on. I then measured the values of each step
>
in PS with the eyedropper. The darkest value read about 10 without the
>
softproof
>
on and ~35 with it on.
Black on a LightJet should measure with an L value of about 10 out of 100; so
35 out of 255 isn't far off. Its the monitor's rendering of this that is the
issue.
This gap slowly closed as you moved up the steps
>
until
>
they were about equivalent in the midtones (black ink was on, white
>
off). So
>
I'm measuring pretty much what I'm seeing but it sure doesn't match a
Lightjet
>
or Fujix print (BTW I'm calibrating my monitors with ProveIt! and the
matching
>
with these prints is excellent - when I don't use the softproof!).
>
>
Also interesting is that I find that the match is much closer when I am
>
softproofing
>
for inkjet prints on a Roland on watercolor papers - there I use the
>
black ink
>
and the washing out effect is a better representation of the lower dmax
>
of the
>
paper compared to Lightjet or Fujix output.
YEs, absolute colorimetric proofing is intended for media like watercolor
paper; but I still reduce the difference between the return table white and
100, and black and 0 values, to get an absolute screen proof that looks like
the final print.
>
>
Are you suggesting that for output such as Lightjet/Fujix white and
>
black ink
>
off is best?
Yes. because their white and black points are roughly the same as the
monitors already.
Why would the softproof view be different than the Convert
>
to Profile
>
view?
Because the Convert to Profile is not using the assymetrical rendering
intents that the softproof is with the check boxes selected. After all, you
don't want to paint the entire sheet of watercolor paper biege (its already
biege), only view it that way on screen, to simulate what the result will
look like. If you actually wanted to color the paper (say to emulate
newsprint on glossy proofing stock) then you would use the absolute intent
for the initial transform, not just in the proofing view, and the result
would color the paper gray as well as show it gray in the preview.
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden