Re: ScannerRGB to WorkingSpaceRGB (rendering intents)
Re: ScannerRGB to WorkingSpaceRGB (rendering intents)
- Subject: Re: ScannerRGB to WorkingSpaceRGB (rendering intents)
- From: Joel <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:57:12 -0500
Olaf <email@hidden> wrote:
Also: given I stay alerted, and I am a printng house and receive color
managed files from many places. If I am lucky, I could find out that all
profiles in job A have been created by a tool from vendor X, and all
profiles in job B have been created by a tool from vendor Y. If I had a
set of printer profiles for my presses done with tool X and another set
created with tool Y - would this put me in a better position (given I'd
use the resp. profiles for my conversions)? (A similar question could be
asked for production stages further up the production chain.)
Provided the profiles for your presses are created with an ICC
compliant application, tried and true tools, inspected, edited,
re-linearized and re-characterized on a regular basis, I see little
advantage to having multiple profiles from multiple vendors for the
same device. I would think the real advantage, being at the end of
the profile chain as the press, would be to spend a reasonable amount
of time and money (taking no shortcuts) on good tools, training and
continuance.
This is the ideal. Making it work is work, but well worth it. A good
profile at the end of the line will attain optimum results and speed
troubleshooting.
And: Is there any knowledge/experience around in the industry like
"Profiles from vendor A exaggerate a certain aspect, discard info about
yet another aspect and calculate all dark colors in this special way", or
maybe insights like "Profiles from vendor B are very strong when it comes
to outdoor photos but they don't handle still lives or textiles very
well" etc., so that one could at least have some clue in what way
profiles from different vendors differ. Also - maybe this is simply
crazy, but asking such questions helps me clarify things for myself -
wouldn't it be possible to create converters that convert a profile from
vendor 'A' to a profile from vendor 'B'?
This implies a rating system, which would be interesting in vicious
sort of way, though hardly constructive. Who would you believe?
Opinion or science?
Boards like this one are quick to trash garbage applications and
those which have survived and continue to do so know the necessity of
good science to maintain survival and market advantage. And while
human color perception differs, which is confusing to say the least,
with the right tools (Colorthink is a interesting one) and a little
benchmark testing it is pretty easy to determine what works and
doesn't work for each individual workplace or workflow.
As for converters, what would they convert? To me a profile is either
good, bad, passable, sloppy, etc. The ability to convert
profile-to-profile through input, output and intent, and edit profile
behavior, switch CMMs and colormetric intents using frontends achieve
similar and customized results. The real matter is: Do the measured
numbers represent the color characteristics of a device or space when
transformed into Lab within reason or no?
--
joel johnstone - designtype
Winnipeg Manitoba Canada
(McProfiling while you wait?)