Re: The MESS at the PRESS campaign
Re: The MESS at the PRESS campaign
- Subject: Re: The MESS at the PRESS campaign
- From: bruce fraser <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 09:41:46 -0700
Henryk,
The only time I speak with the voice of Macworld is when my words
appear printed in that magazine with my byline, so please stop with
the straw men. Macworld is an innocent civilian in these matters.
Convert everything to ECI-RGB, no unauthorized edits to the AtoBx
tables in the profile for the intended printing condition, no manual
custom color separations before the page design, sounds an awful lot
like color management fascism to me, as well as being a recipe for
producing mediocrity. But my objection is not to you building such a
workflow. It's your tedious insistence that everyone else MUST use
such a workflow, whether or not it actually works in their situation.
Assuming that things work as they should when all the evidence of my
senses and of my spectrophotometers indicates otherwise does not
sound like common sense. In fact, it sounds like a triumph of
ideology over common sense. Nobody in their right mind wants to edit
profiles-when we do so, it's out of necessity.
The argument about screen shots didn't come from Macworld, though
their experience certainly bears it out, and you only seem to
understand a small part of it.
We not only want the screen shots to print as neutral, we also want
the type in said screen shots to be readable at the very small sizes
at which they're typically reproduced. Even if the presses that print
trade magazines ran perfect gray-balance from start to finish of the
run (which they don't), the chances of getting a 1963 Toshiba web
press to print with good enough registration to make 8-point 4/c type
readable are vanishing small. "If the press does not run
graybalanced, the press run does not get remunerated" is not an
option here.
A heavy black generation solves both problems with a minimum of fuss.
It doesn't create any problems for proofing, because a single profile
can represent all the content. Most importantly, though, it works,
which is the minimum standard to which I hold a workflow. Even then,
I don't insist that everyone else holds workflows to the same
standard.
A useful distinction can and should be made between early binding
(creating optimal separations for a known output process) and
premature binding (creating random separations for an unknown
output). The arguments you raise against early binding are actually
only applicable to premature binding.
--
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.