Re: Kodak ColorFlow
Re: Kodak ColorFlow
- Subject: Re: Kodak ColorFlow
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 10:42:24 +0100
Ralph DiMarco <email@hidden> wrote:
Does anyone have any experience or info on Kodak ColorFlow software? How
does it compare to the rest of the profiling tools out there? Is it still
based on Praxisoft's software?
I tested versions 1 and 2 and then left off as there were problems
with profiling printers, and as this profiling suite is based on use
of proprietary tags. Neither of these issues means that the solution
is low quality, partly because the profiling problems are probably
fixed, and partly because you can argue a case for proprietary tags,
though personally I don't hold with building workflows around them.
I'm not aware that ColorFlow was based on Praxisoft technology. The
underlying know-how came out of a high-end color developer team whose
company was bought up by Kodak. As I recall this company built
workstation color editing solutions based on proprietary hardware, so
what happened was that Kodak repurposed the color know-how and turned
it into plug-in ICC technology but chucked the hardware base. The
notion of proprietary color editing workstations isn't different from
the notion of proprietary page assembly workstations you had with
pre-PostScript Camex with it's concept of a page description language
built into proprietary hardware - a concept that was in the air in
those days. Apple sank a little money into the 20 man PostScript OEM
group building the LaserWriter controller, and didn't buy up anything
like Camex to take just the software part of the concept. Sort of the
difference in a nutshell -:).