Re: colorsync-users digest, Vol 3 #1383 - 10 msgs
Re: colorsync-users digest, Vol 3 #1383 - 10 msgs
- Subject: Re: colorsync-users digest, Vol 3 #1383 - 10 msgs
- From: mo <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 17:48:00 -0400
- Organization: moing
>
On Jun 5, 2004, at 4:35 PM, mo wrote:
>
>
> I don't buy that Chris.
>
>
>
> It's really not that big of a deal. We have SGI servers as well as
>
> MSW2000, whatever,
>
> and people don't account for the time. It's a moot point when you are
>
> already pushing
>
> large files.
>
>
What about submission of jobs by internet or CD?
So what.
FTP handels it as it does, and CD is as well a moot point. Most are doing DVD with large
jobs.
It's really not a big deal Chirs.!
(not bullshitting)
>
>
I'm fully aware of the problems with application handling of ICC
>
profiles being a big problem. But for now I'm trying to see if there's
>
any value in URL based referencing, or subsetting, of ICC profiles in
>
images instead of increasing the size of the file redundantly by 2MB
>
apiece. I do think it impacts people's workflows.
Chris, come down to Earth, it doesn' need to be more complex, let alone necisitates such
incarnation.
>
>
If "no one" is following SWOP, then why would anyone follow a "standard
>
separation inception point?" I don't follow.
>
Of cource you don't follow. You don't underatand the human nature of the graphics
industry.
I'm not dissing you Chris, I coming from hard core experience of what it's like in the
big ugly.
Tell you what.
If you'd like, I'm offering you a week in the life of, mo, for a "taste of the real
world.
>
>
>
What percent of all incoming CMYK image files have an ICC profile
>
embedded in them?
I'd say about 23%.
>
>
>
> prebinding
>
>
Yuck.
Oh really?
What you don't fully understand, won't hurt you.
mo
_______________________________________________
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.