Re: Imageprint Answers
Re: Imageprint Answers
- Subject: Re: Imageprint Answers
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 07:23:02 -0700
on 1/22/03 7:56 PM, DuWayne Rocus wrote:
>
This makes the assumption that the apps are doing it correctly and
>
Imageprint is not.
It's not. The prints don't match the preview in IP anyway. They are much,
much closer to the soft proof in Photoshop. So if everyone is doing it wrong
but IP, how come they can't match their output to the display? Again, it's
close but I don't trust it. And I don't buy that everyone else is doing it
wrong when I get print to screen matching and compliance among half a dozen
applications as far as soft proofing is concerned.
>
Don't you trust your workflow from scanner/digital camera to printer without
>
looking? I have lots of customers who deal with 1000's of images a day -
>
they don't have time to look.
That's fine. I work with smaller numbers of images that require a higher
degree of accuracy and they need to be viewed, soft-proofed and edited an
image at a time and for that I need Photoshop. I wouldn't subscribe someone
open 1000 images of wigents on a white background in Photoshop. One would
do.
>
Howtek seems to like Imageprints Tools because
>
they have been buying Trident software for years from Colorbyte -- Same
>
tools in IP. Fuji seems to be ok with it.
You seem to think I'm impressed that you've mentioned Howtek for the second
time. I'm not. I ran such a scanner while running a ScanMate 5000 and vastly
preferred the hardware and software from the Dans. But that's what makes for
horse races. The fact that Howtek did anything isn't necessarily a positive
endorsement for anything.
>
The only reason I went so hard on you Andrew is because the are a lot of
>
newbies that read articles/books that guys like you publish and take your
>
word for Gospel.
Do you need publisher?
>
As a dealer I get this all the time.
Well you sold the product! That's your job bud. I was once a dealer too
(never again). I know all the pitfalls.
>
Half the articles I read have major errors in them and yet they get quoted
>
time and time again by everyone who thinks there an expert.
Maybe you should get out of the dealer business and become a pundit. <g>
>
My point was that here are to many combinations of options to get them to
>
match without testing and to know who is correct.
>
I'm not willing to say PhotoShop is perfect. Adobe Photoshop has just as
>
many flaws in there Color theory as Gretag, Monaco, etc.
Funny, they all seem to preview color files like Photoshop...
Andrew Rodney
_______________________________________________
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.