Re: ImagePrint Answer
Re: ImagePrint Answer
- Subject: Re: ImagePrint Answer
- From: "Cris Daniels" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:16:11 -0400
<Rendering intents alone is not the way to produce the best output. IF
you are in a workflow where you have no options but to convert and print,
fine. But if you think a profile alone and the right option of a rendering
intent is going to produce the best reproduction, you're dead wrong. I said
it once and I'll say it again. The profile knows NOTHING about the image. If
you really believe that one size fits all for conversions, we are in serious
disagreement on getting the best color from files.>
This is a case where a newbie reading our posts would wind up very
confused. I know that the profile knows nothing. But using your logic, if you
preview an image with a not-so-hot profile and don't like the result, that
hammering the image into shape in Photoshop is going to allow me to get it
printing properly which is simply not true. If the profile determines that
print X can only print color X, you can't make the case that using Photoshop I
can manipulate the image to print better reds for example. If the profile
sucks trash it. If the profile is excellent, an image that is properly
prepared shouldn't need any (or very minimal) work.
I've also found through experience that profilers can build some pretty
different quality as far as the display tables, Monaco Profiler creates much
better preview tables than PMP4.1 at least on the CMYK devices that I've
profiled. The final output however is quite close, which proves to me that
working on the image in a "softproof " mode would simply lead me down the
wrong path if I were working the image with the Gretag profile. I've seen
many cases where especially canvas will preview pretty horrible but prints
really excellent. The whole concept of calibrating and profiling is to
virtually eliminate playing with every file to get an acceptable print, so
altering each file to print is going backwards in the advancement of that
concept. I also create multiple profiles for each media (Monaco Profiler,
PMP4.1, and Colorbtye ) for each media type so that I can toggle thru profiles
and rendering intents and decide which I like best, but screwing with every
print is pretty crazy. Find the one that gives the best visual attributes that
I'm looking for without clipping and I'm in business.
I can't imagine doing an installation where you sell a customer on a high-end
monitor, color management hardware/software, installation, training, get their
equipment all calibrated and profiled, and tell them they need to screw with
every image that they create to get the best print after they drop $20,000. A
completely calibrated and profiled system along with a consistant work
environment (lighting) should make high quality printing pretty simple, the
problem is getting the client to drop $20k to get there, people (an alarming
number of pros I might add) want to do it with an uncalibrated monitor,
ProfilerRGB and their TurboScan 2000 flatbed. As for profiling ImagePrint, get
out your checkbook ( Duwayne probably accepts Visa, Mastercard, or Discover as
well). CMYK targets are not output exactly like RGB targets, and if they are
they will be unusable for creating a profile. As most other RIP's need to be
profiled via CMYK, I'm suprised that you assumed RGB profiling. I remember
getting lots of flak (I'm not accusing you personally) for proposing that
profiling this RIP RGB was the way to go, citing RGB as the inferior method
of profiling a RIP. I think that the results speak for themselves.
Cris Daniels
_______________________________________________
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.