Unity profiles revisited
Unity profiles revisited
- Subject: Unity profiles revisited
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 04:58:25 +0200
John Zimmerer wrote:
If you would like to make suggestions for changing the default
profiles, I'll >be happy to discuss options.
The unity profiles exist because ColorSync needs a profile for every
data color space, even when the data color space and the profile
connection space are the same.
This is why ColorSync needs a profile for Lab ('Generic LAB Profile')
and for XYZ ('Generic XYZ Profile').
It would be preferable if ColorSync did not need a profile for every
data color space, including for Lab and XYZ. This is dealt with in
Linocolor 6, and in iQueue 1.0, for instance.
It would also be preferable if the Lab profile were renamed after the
parameters of ICC Lab, thus 'Lab D50 2 Degree Profile'. (And if
everybody else would rename their versions of the unity profiles the
same, then that would be fine, but at the moment all are different.)
Choosing an Lab that gives you bad results is in the greater scheme
of things unlikely, since all the unity profiles are D50 2 degree,
whatever name they bear.
Choosing an RGB or CMYK profile that gives you bad results is quite
likely, because as we have discussed several times before, 'generic'
is as easily taken as an endorsement in the sense of 'universal' or
'standard' as in the sense of 'unmodified' or 'unsuited'.
The technical requirement is that ColorSync must have a data color
space profile, and for that any data color space profile will do. At
the moment this is likely to produce a bad user experience, and that
means it is commercially bad for branding.
Therefore, it makes sense to use a data color space profile which
will produce good results, instead of a data color space profile
which is guaranteed to produce unacceptable results.
For RGB I would suggest Adobe RGB, if it were not for the limitation
that it does not support all production inksets. This is why the ECI
created eciRGB10 for the ISO 12647 ink / paper gamuts.
For CMYK I would suggest the only printing standard which both the US
and Europe cast their vote for, and that is ISO 12647. The new
international newsprint standard profile is ISO 12647-3.
Technically, you can't have in CMYK what you did not first have in
RGB. Therefore, the choice of a default RGB working space is tied to
the existence and continued development of standard printing
conditions.
It does not make sense to have default ColorSync conversions which
are not based on international standards. If users apply profiles
based on international standards to the wrong type of workflow, then
so be it. You can't cram and muffle and squash the full EktaChrome
space into ISO 12647, here you're better off with a high gamut single
print LightJet. But the default profiles don't have to shoot for
non-default workflows, they have to shoot for default workflows. And
they don't at the moment.
BTW if I understand the Adobe folks right, then 'EuroScale Coated v2'
and 'EuroScale Uncoated v2' are built off the ISO 12647 data. If so,
then the profiles are misnamed as there quite literally is no
EuroScale. We had a thread over here scratching our scalps on the ECI
list with the FOGRA folks over this Adobe naming scheme. And the
conclusion was that the Adobe scheme is a misconception. The US voted
for ISO 12647. If that means the US has two printing standards, then
so be it.
Just my ten cents, and ever so lightly stated, as always -:).
--
------------------------------------------
Henrik Holmegaard, TechWrite
Stationay +45 3880 0721 - +45 3881 0721
Mobile +45 2178 3959
Toelloesevej 69, 2700 Broenshoej, Denmark
------------------------------------------