Re: Who's right?
Re: Who's right?
- Subject: Re: Who's right?
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 18:23:24 -0600
On Jun 5, 2004, at 4:16 AM, roberto diego torrado wrote:
Hello,
After reading the paper "Color Management in Mac OSX" I finally got
the idea behind the ColorSync filters. So far so good. Alas when I
apply (in Preview) a filer for the Epson 2200 EnhancedMatte@2880 with
intent relative, and the same setting in PS7 (black point compensation
on), the respective soft proofs didn't match!. Certainly not by much
but real.
Digital color measure reports:
PS7:
R: 232,102
G: 147,2245
B: 123,5102
Preview:
R: 211,6122
G: 139,6122
B: 116,1225
The source is an untagged RGB file. Who's right?
If the file is untagged, Preview assumes monitor RGB as source, and
monitor RGB as destination so you get a null transform. On Photoshop,
the RGB working space setting is the assumed source profile for an
untagged image, and monitor RGB is the destination. So that's why there
is a difference.
HOWEVER, I don't know how you built your Quartz filter, so I don't know
if your soft proof is tagged or not, or really what you're doing so I
can only guess. But by the looks of the numbers, it appears that this
is a difference between using black point compensation and not using
black point compensation. Quality conversions require black point
compensation. Without it, we get lower quality conversions to output
devices.
Chris Murphy
Color Remedies (TM)
www.colorremedies.com/realworldcolor
---------------------------------------------------------
Co-author "Real World Color Management"
Published by PeachPit Press (ISBN 0-201-77340-6)
_______________________________________________
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.
| References: | |
| | >Who's right? (From: roberto diego torrado <email@hidden>) |