Re: untagged RGB data
Re: untagged RGB data
- Subject: Re: untagged RGB data
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:10:58 -0700
On Dec 20, 2003, at 1:33 PM, John Zimmerer wrote:
You don't have to embed the same profile you used to separate the
images, only a profile based on the one used for separation. Since
you've already used a PCS-Device table to separate the image, all you
really need is one Device->PCS table to take care of proofing the
data. And that table doesn't have to be 16-bit with 33 grid points --
it can be 8-bit with 11 grid points.
Size is not the only problem, and 500K is still too much when we're
talking about even 100 images, let alone 1000 let alone 10,000. You
aren't ever going to get a catalog printer to tag 90,000 images with
subsetted CMYK profiles. With the latest color management policies
Adobe has introduced they're basically saying embedding RGB images by
default is good for the first time; and at the same time not doing it
for CMYK images.
And besides how do you suggest we get a hold of such stripped down
profiles? If applications that saved them did this automatically that
would be great, but to suggest having to build separate profiles just
for the purpose of embedding and expecting users to use them for
embedding and not making separation - phooey it won't happen. What
you'll end up with is full profile embedded in images and crappy ones
used for making separations and THEN color management WILL officially
suck, and demonstrably so.
Chris Murphy
Color Remedies (TM)
www.colorremedies.com/realworldcolor
---------------------------------------------------------
Co-author "Real World Color Management"
Published by PeachPit Press (ISBN 0-201-77340-6)
_______________________________________________
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.