• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: I hate RIPs
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I hate RIPs


  • Subject: Re: I hate RIPs
  • From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 07:48:29 +0100

Nick Wheeler <email@hidden> wrote:

Epsons just want to have QuickDraw.

The dual printing pipeline problem goes all the way back to the original ImageWriter which used the OS pipeline and the LaserWriter with its PostScript controller which used the application pipeline (from Pshop, PaceMaker, XPress etc).

If Apple had not taken so darn long to get QuickDraw GX on the street, then Adobe and Quark API business models wouldn't have been so far progressed that OpenDoc was a threat, and GX would have been less of a threat to Type 1 and to some extent to PostScript, then both companies might have been more inclined to port their application software, and we would have had a device independent OS engine in System 7.5.

GX had an approach similar to PDF and a format that competed with PDF. You spooled pages to disk, creating page objects ready to be handled individually (: page independence) which is not possible with PostScript. And all fonts, all images etc were part of the page as in PDF, too. The object-oriented format was called Portable Digital Document (PDD) and had its own icon -:).

Why does this matter? It matters because it was clear a very long time ago that the world of OPI was rapidly waning. Nobody wants to work like we did fifteen years ago: Photographers do photographs and layouters do layout and ne'er shall the twain workflows meet except through the CEPS scanner and OPI system in the service bureau.

There is money in RGB retouching and no money in CMYK scan for print (: direct to CMYK). There is money in integrating images and layout directly in PDF and no money in handing around native application Quark files. Anybody can do that, and everybody has been doing that for a decade and a half. The photographer and the layouter today form a workgroup and the service bureau either joins the content workgroup at agency level or joins the printing company.

So whatever we may feel about RIPs and their arrival in quantity in the world of content creation, without them we can't color manage the integrated PDF page designs which will increasingly be putting bread on our tables. Trying to color manage isolated loose images on a non-PostScript system is not the way ahead.

But this discussion is about as old as the List -:).
_______________________________________________
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.

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: I hate RIPs
      • From: email@hidden (Bruce Fraser)
  • Prev by Date: rgb printer profiles or cmyk?
  • Next by Date: Re: Simulating a Matchprint
  • Previous by thread: RE: rgb printer profiles or cmyk?
  • Next by thread: Re: I hate RIPs
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread