RE: The MESS at the PRESS campaign
RE: The MESS at the PRESS campaign
- Subject: RE: The MESS at the PRESS campaign
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 22:36:14 +0200
So what does it mean in practice if no conversion is used for the print
and a device link conversion (whether ICC or proprietary) is used for
the proof?
It means that there is no relationship between the print and the proof.
The print contains any mix of CMYK values while the proof carries out a
blind conversion which assigns the intended printing condition as
source and converts into the proof space.
The ECI white paper began with a piece of research that among other
things looked at the practices of ECI members with regard to non-ICC
visual adjustments as compared to ICC colorimetric adjustments. Similar
studies were carried out by many, IFRA and FOGRA.
Assuming the image designer and page designer are technically literate,
the studies suggest that with colorimetric adjustments samples of
proofs from many sites look more consistent than samples of proofs
based on visual adjustments.
Which is why the European Color Initiative works to promote open
standards ICC color management, ISO 12647 printing conditions which are
colorimetrically defined and self-certifiable, and PDF/X-3 which makes
PDF fully device independent.
This is a gradual process. Adobe Photoshop is now fully ICC-enabled and
the image design community accepts this as a significant benefit over
the simple forward rendering Adobe Sepation Table (AST) format which no
other application software supported.
Adobe InDesign 3 is the first page design application to support fully
invertible color mangement and text management in a situation where
proprietary proofing systems go hand in hand with ignorance of the
consistency benefits of device independence.
It is possible that those clammering for advanced editing in ICC device
links will be given what they are clammering for, but ICC device links
will reseparate correctly if and only if ICC device profile conversions
have been used correctly at the prior stage, either in image capture,
image design or page design application software.
There are some here on this List who think that discussions of Adobe
InDesign don't belong. There are others here on this List who think
that standards-based printing and proofing don't belong. There are even
some who think that interoperability does not belong. Are you folks
sure you are talking about the real world -:).
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.