Re: untagged RGB data
Re: untagged RGB data
- Subject: Re: untagged RGB data
- From: "john c." <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:43:06 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Murphy" <email@hidden>
I said:
>
> Yet, everyone does. I'm in this business almost 30 years, and I have
>
> yet to
>
> encounter one agency person, pre-press person or printer who can tell
>
> me
>
> anything about what his CMYK file was created for.
Chris replies:
>
Yet the world still manages to turn. They still get proofs out, get
>
paid for them, get the job printed per customer expectations
>
(eventually) and get paid for that too. They get a CMYK image, they
>
make a proof someone color corrects it and they get a print. That it's
>
inefficient is really another debate.
What I'm continually fighting is the rash assumption that because someone
has been able to get a file to print correctly with certain press conditions
(which are hidden and unknown to me - maybe even long forgotten), then I
should have no problem getting the same result from that file when I open
it. A profile (or any other way of passing on some knowledge about the file)
would surely simplify my life.
My latest approach is to assume that unless someone can tell me otherwise,
all untagged CMYK files are "U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2", and if the color is
wacky, then they must want it that way. Is there anything wrong with this
approach?
You're right, it's another discussion, but with such ignorance comes such
arrogance, and I never miss an opportunity to stress that more information
is better than less. That someone might act on it inappropriately shouldn't
be an excuse to provide less information about a file.
john castronovo
tech photo & imaging
_______________________________________________
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.