Re: Rip for 9600
Re: Rip for 9600
- Subject: Re: Rip for 9600
- From: Terry Wyse <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 09:26:41 -0400
on 8/29/02 2:08 AM, Graeme Gill wrote:
>
Terry Wyse wrote:
>
> The cool thing you can also do (that differs it from ColorProof) is you can
>
> give it RGB/Lab data and get a CMYK simulation proof.
>
>
Yes, but what does this prove, unless the conversion is
>
exactly the same as the RGB/Lab conversion that gets applied when
>
you go to press ? How would you make sure that the two separate
>
conversions from RGB/Lab match each other ?
Like I stated further in my message, you also have the option of saving the
proof results as a TIFF image so the resulting image uses the same
conversion as the proof itself. I wasn't saying that this was the proof used
to go to press.
More to the point, this RGB2CMYK simulation proof I would regard as a sort
of "temporary" proof during the image manipulation stages and that a FINAL
proof would be performed using the final CMYK data. It's a workflow option,
that's all.
I can think of several workflows that I've been a part of where this would
be useful: The digital photographer captures the image in RGB and provides a
a CMYK simulation proof from the RGB data. The prepress people take this RGB
image, perform further corrections as needed and then do the final
conversion to CMYK and proof this. The first proof from the photog is an
accurate CMYK representation without actually performing the CMYK conversion
to the file itself.
Terry
__________________________________
WyseConsul
Color Management Consulting
v 704.843.0858
e 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.