Re: BEST v5
Re: BEST v5
- Subject: Re: BEST v5
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:33:11 EDT
In a message dated 10/9/03 2:47:16 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
> Are the overall results (for proofing and "fine art" RIPs)
>
Where is the difference?
>
Well, lets see: the average fine art user has little use for PostScript, and
would rather pay less for a raster-only RIP, and is willing to sacrifice
Pantone and other spot color matching, press emulation and a fair number of other
specialty functions at the same time. A fine art RIP has good controls of ink
limits and linearization on one hand, and easy profiling, maybe even RGB only,
on the other. It should offer some nesting and croping options, at least for
larger printers; and it should support the more affordable fine art printers,
like the Epson 2200, and any other desktop Epsons that we aren't supposed to be
mentioning by number yet.
And did I mention that it should be *affordable*, and not require a
consultant or training to learn to use? Having it run on the Mac as well as Windows is
important too, since users will be supporting it themselves, and don't want to
learn a new OS to do it.
There has always been an attitude by the more proofing-oriented RIP
developers that you just sell proofing RIPs to fine art users, or maybe dumb them down
and sell them a bit cheaper to the fine art market... while fine art users
have been more interested in RIPS that are more specificly designed and marketed
to their needs.
C. David Tobie
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
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.