Re:A mongrel environment...
Re:A mongrel environment...
- Subject: Re:A mongrel environment...
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:28:46 -0700
>
1.) Where does the profile finally get applied to the output file to color
>
correct the image? In a Postscript RIP? What level RIPs support this?
I would stay away from doing it in the RIP. Plan on doing it in Photoshop
6. You can even do it in PageMaker 6.5 as long as you stick to TIFFs (and
I think it only converts to CMYK destination profiles). If you need
something fancier, then look at Praxisoft ICC AutoFlow for batch
processing your files (either stand alone images, or an entire PostScript
stream).
>
>
2.) We intend to buy a DTP41 scanning sp. for print output. Will this
>
properly read our halftoned color output from the Docucolor, etc?
Yes.
>
Is the UV
>
filter a no brainer or is there a downside?
If you can stay away from papers that use brighteners you'll be better
off overall. I had a DTP41 converted into a UV and subsequently had it
converted back. I got bizarre results with certain toner based devices;
although whitepoint readings were accurate. Now, if I have a problem with
the whitepoint measuring too blue, I just do a white point adjust
manually.
>
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?
Based on my limited experience with the ColorTron II, Monitor Optimizer,
Color Vision's Monitor Spyder, and even the Sequel IV colorimeter, they
are all more accurate (in addition to being infinitely faster) than the
ColorTron II.
>
4.) Given all the above, does anyone have any suggestions for profiling
>
and
>
editing SW?
Color Vision Doctor Pro or Kodak Custom Color ICC. They use essentially
the same concept (they are a Photoshop plug-in so you use Photoshop tools
to edit the profiles), except the Kodak's software installs a billion
extensions into your system (OK about 50, not a billion). I haven't had a
problem with these extensions and thus far have more time logged using
Custom Color ICC. But suffice to say one of these two products is likely
what you are looking for.
>
>
5.) What color space should we work in for PhotoShop and archive in? I
>
assume
>
it will be a variant of RGB, but which?
Today is a good day to catch a tiger by the toe. My recommendation is if
you will be sharing files with people who are not using color management
or making use of embedded profiles, use ColorMatch RGB. If the images are
primarily in-house or used in a color managed workflow, then I would use
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?
Yes exactly. The output device can't exactly print all colors the monitor
can. So it's necessary to instruct Photoshop to simulate the output
device on the monitor to show the compromised areas.
>
7.) Obviously the PC's won't run Colorsync. Any impressions of how
>
well color
>
management works in a 2000 OS?
Well if you can get past that ugly inconsistent user interface you're
mostly home free. Adobe products (Photoshop 6, Illustrator 9) have their
own engines built-in and you can use that. Praxisoft is supposed to have
an NT version of ICC AutoFlow sometime soon, not sure when. Most
profiling packages, and tools are overwhelmingly Macintosh.
Does anyone know if Custom Color ICC or Doctor Pro work only on Macs?
You might just want to get a Macintosh. (Yes I'm biased, I have to use
both on a regular basis.)
Chris Murphy