Re: Standards
Re: Standards
- Subject: Re: Standards
- From: Peter Figen <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 08:59:59 -0700
- Organization: Peter Figen Photography
>
I think here is where the problem is. It is important to differentiate
>
between a standard CMYK which any printer should be able to print if his
>
system is calibrated properly, but this standard does not necessarily need
>
to be followed on a day to day basis. Ex. A printer has his own prepress
>
and hence has his press profiled, uses this profile for his seps, and has
>
his proofing system set up to predict what will come out on this press. On
>
jobs he does all the work for, he is open to use his own special recipe to
>
give added value. But, if a job comes in which has been done outside, he
>
can proof it with a standard profile, calibrate the press to the standard
>
and print the job successfully.
If only this were the case. In every instance where printers have gone DTP and are using
digital proofing, the proofing systems are "calibrated to the press" according to the
various prepress departments. Only one of the digital proofing systems was close to
their formal analog system. Only one vendor had or even knew what an ICC profile was, and
NONE could offer proofs for any other standard, only whatever arbitrary aim points their
proofing system was set to.
These are my experiences with at least half a dozen reputable printing houses in the
greater Los Angeles area. I just send them a ProfileMaker target, make my profile and go
about my business. I'm sure people in other regions will have the same results.
Peter Figen
_______________________________________________
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.