• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: BEST v5
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: BEST v5


  • Subject: Re: BEST v5
  • From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 23:18:13 +0200

On Sunday, Oct 12, 2003, at 20:26 Europe/Copenhagen, bruce fraser wrote:

For those many photographers for whom the loose image IS the page, a PDF/Postscript workflow is very counterproductive. It's slower, more complicated, and it introduces many uncertainties in the handling of resolution, color and tone. If you need Postscript, you need Postscript. If you simply want to render photographic imagery as well as the device will permit, Postscript is a hindrance, not a help.


One does not publish loose images except on the web where they can't be color managed. Loose images are placed in a page which is then published as color managed. If the photographer is unable to receive a PDF from the graphic designer and / or the press operator in order to take part in the publishing process, but believes her job is done when she has uploaded her TIFF images, then to be sure she may be able to take part in some projects, but increasingly she will cut herself off from work in which she cannot take part.

The photographer is compelled to create content afresh. If she does not, she cannot charge for her content. She is also forced to invest in hardware to the tune of thousands and thousands of dollars in order to set up her studio. Therefore, the photographer has been singled out by color management marketing strategies, because she is the most likely to see the benefits of a late binding workflow for running her business, and because she is accustomed to high levels of investment.

Before the digital darkroom, the photographer's product was the chrome. If the scan did not match the chrome, the viewable graphic was the bottom line. In the days after the digital darkroom, the photographer's product is the edited image which she has created on her monitor. And in the days after PDF has replaced native file interchange, if she tries to sell the new viewable graphic, that is, the device data with its CIE reference created on the monitor, the way she sold the old viewable graphic which was a chrome, she will cut herself out of the workflow.

This is not a color problem but a business problem, to answer Clemens.

Thanks,
Henrik
_______________________________________________
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.

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: BEST v5
      • From: bruce fraser <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: BEST v5 (From: bruce fraser <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: BEST v5
  • Next by Date: Re: BEST v5
  • Previous by thread: Re: BEST v5
  • Next by thread: Re: BEST v5
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread