Re: A mongrel environment...
Re: A mongrel environment...
- Subject: Re: A mongrel environment...
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:49:50 -0700
on 1/29/01 10:34 AM, Scott Kilbourne at email@hidden wrote:
>
1.) Where does the profile finally get applied to the output file to color
>
correct the image? In a Postscript RIP?
It *can* depending on the RIP but there are reasons why you may not want to.
This technique of "in RIP CMS" has advantages of speed (you just send tagged
RGB files to the RIP and all the work is done there). But there is something
to be said for doing the conversions in Photoshop when you intend to do
editing in output space based on what you see after the conversion. Of
course in Photoshop 6 you now have RGB soft proofing so you *could* set up a
soft proof and edit in your Working Space based on what you see in output
space. For CMYK work, there are edits that just need to be done in CMYK so
in RIP sep's will not work in such a case.
>
Color Synergy 2.0, we had to perform "color circuits" in PhotoShop to create
>
output device specific output files. This seemed cludgey (and still does),
>
but
>
seems to be required sometimes
You don't have to use color circuits to get to an output space using
profiles in Photoshop 6 (or 5). There are some advantages of this approach
but it's not something you must do these days. If you decide to go a
different software route, you can't use the circuits anyway.
>
2.) We intend to buy a DTP41 scanning sp. for print output. Will this
>
properly read our halftoned color output from the Docucolor, etc? Is the UV
>
filter a no brainer or is there a downside?
It should work just fine and yes, I'd go the UV route since you have some
output devices that will benefit from it.
>
3.) We have a Colortron II spectrophotometer ($1,000). Xrite says that the
>
$500 DTP 92 colorimeter does a better job of monitor calibration. This
>
doesn't
>
seem right. Comments?
Yes, the DTP-92 is better for monitors. The ColorTron was never on the top
of my list for dealing with a display! I'd consider the Color Vision Spyder
for the display and the DTP-41 for output.
>
4.) Given all the above, does anyone have any suggestions for profiling and
>
editing SW?
I'm still a really big fan of Gretag's ProfileMaker Pro but it's pricey. You
may consider their iBundle which includes the software plus their
SpectroScan which would handle display and output. But again, it's costly
being the Rolls Royce of products. There are a number of other good products
out there at a lower price but ProfileMaker Pro has yet to ever fail at
producing great profiles in an elegant UI.
>
5.) What color space should we work in for PhotoShop and archive in? I
>
assume
>
it will be a variant of RGB, but which?
I'd suggest Adobe RGB 1998.
>
6.) I can't quite get my mind around emulating output devices on a monitor
>
and
>
then embedding an output profile. If the profile will "corect" the output
>
device
>
to produce "accurate" color, why does the monitor image need to emulate
>
anything? For gamut purposes and to demonstrate rendering intent?
You want a soft proof for one (assuming I understand your question). You
need to convert and embed the output profile to get the file in output space
AND produce the correct preview in Photoshop 6.
>
7.) Obviously the PC's won't run Colorsync. Any impressions of how well
>
color
>
management works in a 2000 OS?
Once the profiles are built, you could do all the work within Photoshop 6
and be just fine. Outside of Photoshop and all bets are off.
Andrew Rodney