Re: Quark 5 CMS
Re: Quark 5 CMS
- Subject: Re: Quark 5 CMS
- From: Dave Gaudet <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:52:00 -0400
on 7/11/02 , Chris Murphy wrote:
>
A rendering intent
>
specified within the PDF file itself can override the default Acrobat
>
rendering intent.
>
Actually you have to go into Edit:Preferences:Color Management and
>
uncheck BPC in Conversion options. It's not directly available in the
>
The main thing missing out of the print dialog box is rendering intent
>
control.
Without a doubt, I agree that color controls that are scattered here and
there in the preferences of both Acrobat and Distiller should be adjustable
in one place in the print dialogue of Acrobat. And I agree that individually
controllable rendering intents (in the print dialog) are sorely lacking.
Maybe Acrobat 6....?
Anyway IMO it's still better in comparison to Quark's color management,
which has an even more convoluted ordering of ColorSync preferences,
document preferences, check boxes, print dialogue profile selections,
floating pallets, image restrictions (Tiff only, please) and also (at least
in Quark 4) no selection of rendering intents. Ugh.
>
Realistically, PDF/X-1a:2001 is the most reliable method to submit PDF
>
jobs for print. Once you've made a PDF/X-3 document, what systems
>
exist today that will properly make separations?
I regularly send out PDF/X-1a:2001, but I think, personally, I would not
blindly send out a PDF/X-3 right now because it is so new. I'll have to do a
little more research on what exactly is tagged in the X-3, and how. On face
value, one would think that printing out of Acrobat, with the correct
output profile specified, one would get results not unlike printing a
PDF/X-1a without color management...<gulp>
>
For managing embedded profiles, and converting images from one mode to
>
another (not repurposing unless you convert to RGB/LAB, then back to CMYK
>
using a different destination profile), you can use these tools. I have a
>
copy of PitStop Pro and don't see a way to change the rendering intent
>
associated with objects in a PDF. Last I checked, which was some time
>
ago, CrackerJack didn't either. I wouldn't consider any of these
>
application suitable for producing anything but rudimentary proofs, which
>
is unfortunate. Adobe let's us do monitor soft proofing, but not hard
>
proofing from Acrobat 5.
Well, I don't have a marketing budget <grin>, but I think I can scrape up
the postage to send you a representative proof from my Epson 10k DYE along
with the printed piece, and PDF as evidence that even without the ability to
selectively choose rendering intents, I can make proofs from Distiller and
Acrobat 5 that are *vastly* better then rudimentary. Soft proofing?? Now
*that's* rudimentary. :-)
Dave Gaudet
PixelGlow Studios
_______________________________________________
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.