Profile Editing, now for the practical . . .
Profile Editing, now for the practical . . .
- Subject: Profile Editing, now for the practical . . .
- From: Darrin Southern <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 17:20:40 +1000
OK, I have ColorBlind Edit 3.0 (MAC) and I have read through the 'full'
manual from page 114 to 266, and although I do not have the 'dangerous
options' (as I believe that this was removed when version 3.0 was released),
things seem to match up for features, (and also in the interface).
Although, page 170 does mention an 'Optimize Profile' and 'Optimize Image'
options that I can not find.
The test images I have, look correct when I view then in PhotoShop with the
assigned profile - a custom built profile from a customers printing press.
I am assuming this profile to be correct for this exercise.
This also being the 'reference profile' I am using in BEST 4.2.3 XL.
As a test, I have opened an image in CB Edit, and set my source profile to
the custom profile I have built for the Semi Gloss (the 'paper profile' for
the BEST XL to the Epson 7000) in PrintOpen 4.0 (PC).
I have not selected any destination or simulation profile in CB Edit, as I
want to ensure I am just editing the 'proofer' profile. I have set the
intent to Relative Color.
Using the eyedropper in the 'Selective Colo'r window, I selected a very warm
red in my image, and then converted it to a vivid blue. I really wanted to
see a change in the source profile when I used it, as the previous 'color
correcting' edits I tried did NOT seem to change the final output on the
BEST/Epson.
I then saved this profile from CB Edit 3.0 from 'Save Profile' in the File
Menu, as an 'ICC Input' profile, with 'other edits' as the option and I call
this the 'blue paper profile'.
I opened my image in PS 6.0.1 with the 'reference profile' as my working
space, and then did a profile to profile conversion to the new 'blue paper
profile', and the bright reds now look like the bright blue (as it did in CB
Edit) I then converted back to the 'reference profile, and the blues went
back to red (ONLY WITH PERCEPTUAL RENDERING - NOT RELATIVE COLOR).
Thinking about it, the image numbers for the 'dark red profile', c:33 m:98
y:73 k:23 were converted to 'blue profile' c:47 m:98 y:66 k:4 - which is not
that 'different' a red - when both sets of numbers are applied (to build a
new color with the numbers) when the reference (press profile) is the
working space. The difference being the lab conversion, I am guessing.
So when I apply this logic to the BEST, I sent it an image (with various
pixel values for an image) that are made up of c+y+m+k values (with no
embedded profile as a reference - as the embedded profile is assumed to be
the reference profile in BEST, I'm guessing again) and the new 'blue paper
profile'
What do you think my BEST/Epson prints look like ?
Blue or Red ?
Does the BEST/Epson printed output change if I use 'Colorimetric - Relative'
or 'Photo Realistic' within the BEST ?
No wonder I needed more beers this weekend . . .
Darrin.
>
Andrew wrote:
>
>
> Edit the profile of the proofer, NOT the final device.
>
Henrik also added:
>
>
Yes, never the print production profile. If there are edits to be
>
made to the print production profile, then they are the
>
responsibility of the press owner. It's nice to see this distinction
>
now made.