Re: Best profile software
Re: Best profile software
- Subject: Re: Best profile software
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:42:52 +0200
"John Brink" <email@hidden> wrote:
We use device link profiles with our
Iris and press. They are pretty tedious and time consuming to make. We have
to "tweak" them and that is the part that needs to be improved. Greytag
claims their new sw will out perform Profile Wizard and that it is better to
make profiles than device link profiles.
These are not claims, but well-founded workflow arguments. If you
wish to have a better understanding of the pros and cons of device
link profiles, look in the on-line GretagMacbeth iQueue manual. Then
if you disagree, bring it up on here on the List for clarification
and discussion.
Device link profiles are a legacy of non-modular firmware conversions
of the pre-ICC era, and according to the ICC specification they may
not be embedded. So the output of a device link conversion is only
useable at all for the final transformation into the device space of
the marking engine after which the data should be flushed. The output
of a device link conversion is not intended for any further
conversions, whether for soft-proofing on the monitor or other forms
of repurposing. And these are only some of the limitations of device
link profiles.
You will also find a Scitex engineer reporting these limitations here
on the List wrt to architecture of the ProfileWizard software.
Hope this helps.