Color management chamber of horrors -:)
Color management chamber of horrors -:)
- Subject: Color management chamber of horrors -:)
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:09:34 +0200
While it's not fun, I'd take it any day over trying to color-manage
a 3-year old Fiery RIP...
I really and truly tried. It just sat there squat in its casing on
the floor, glaring stiffly at me. So I tried glaring back, but we
didn't get on together. The Fiery and the Epson 5000 and the UV
papers went back to Epson without a review -:).
And I'm not saying you can't use the RGB printing pipeline for
proofing. You can do many things, but the point is that you are
trying to use a pipeline for something it wasn't meant for.
Like the office printers that have a built-in RGB default CSA. The
office applications send color blind RGB, and the choice is between
the default PostScript Level 1 color blind RGB to CMYK rotation with
customizable black generation, and a shot at something just a bit
more decent with a CIEBased workflow. So are CIEBased workflows the
dumps? No, not if they are used for what they do OK.
For proofing you basically want a pipeline that supports CMYK and
which has no built-in limits on the native gamut of the proofing
device. It's just common sense.
Overall, as Dan Caldwell said a while back, the problem is that every
application software, every driver, every ... tries to be the
smartest kid on the block.
Me, I try to be really really dumb. Which means poking my head into
the middle of the road stuff for the middle of the road publishing
market with a middle of the road investment cut-off. There is so much
to investigate, so much to test that it is not humanly possible to
build validated and verified workflows using everything under the sun.
Hmmm...should get a pith sun helmet, or maybe a ditto spine pad. The
old Kenya saying anno 1900 was that the sun withered either your
brains or your spine or both. Might be the helmet and pad help for
color management walkabouts, too -:).