Re: Preserving the black channel
Re: Preserving the black channel
- Subject: Re: Preserving the black channel
- From: Terry Wyse <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:57:20 -0400
Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden> WROTE
Subject: Re: Preserving the black channel
>
I'm afraid this is a misunderstanding.
>
>
If an application has a K 100 object in space A which it wants
>
matched to space B, then that is by definition a color match which
>
requires that the incoming K 100 object be converted into a composite
>
CMYK object unless it so happens that K 100 in space A and K 100 in
>
space B are the same measured color.
Yes, but what IF that same 100%K in the source could be mapped using, say,
83%K in the destination? Wouldn't that be more desirable than ALWAYS being
forced to use a composite CMYK mix?
A perfect example of this would be to take a a single set of target
measurement data and then build TWO different profiles with slightly
different separation parameters (maybe just changing the total ink value).
Now, perform a profile-to-profile conversion and you'll see that the K-only
values will get converted to composite CMYK EVEN THOUGH the inks used in
both profiles are EXACTLY THE SAME! IOW, there would've been no need to map
K to CMYK in this scenario.
And of course I know WHY this happens but I just see this as an example of
where ICC profiles, as they're currently used, fail in this situation.
CMYK-to-CMYK profile conversions is one area where it simply doesn't work as
expected or, at the very least, can create unexpected results.
Just my opinion.
Terry
_____________________________
Terence L. Wyse
Color Management Specialist
All Systems Integration, Inc.
http://www.allsystems.com
email@hidden
_____________________________
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.