• 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: Remote proofing
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Remote proofing


  • Subject: Re: Remote proofing
  • From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:17:53 +0100

On onsdag, mar 10, 2004, at 13:20 Europe/Copenhagen, Roger Breton wrote:

would *needed* in order for PDF/X3 fully
address color color management?


Leaving aside the strategic level and looking at the tactical level, it is not only the case that the printing industry is opposed to RGB. It is fair to say that the photographic industry is _also_ opposed to RGB.

Now why would that be?

It is desirable to not have CMYK but to RGB in order to achieve the most clean and crisp transparency flattening in the flattening module of a PostScript 3 interpreter.

Therefore, when Photoshop users send content to an InDesign user, they may send their own choice of RGB Working Space tagged content.

They may not send their own choice of CMYK Working Space tagged content but must agree to leave the conversion to a truly late binding solution.

Therefore, only the Perceptual conversion is secure as the ICC has not agreed on a 5th rendering intent for Relative Colorimetric with Black Point Compensation.

This rekindles the objection users of Photoshop 1 to Photoshop 4 have always voiced, and still voice, over Perceptual rendering in the ICC Specification.

In this sense the LinoColor / ColorOpen implementation was always correct in its approach to forward rendering, as it was always correct in its Absolute Colorimetric approach to backward rendering.

But it doesn't help to state this, because every article and every book on color management according to the ICC Specification rejects Perceptual rendering, and thus directs the photographer to convert to CMYK Working Space tagged content.

Most stories have two faces, and this one has, too.

So part of the challenge is to reconstitute the validity of Perceptual rendering, which is not going to go down well with a lot of people on the image design side, just as the printing and proofing side has problems with proprietary systems that claim better quality but are more properly described as non-interoperable.

Thanks,
Henrik


----------------------------------------------------
Henrik Holmegaard, Technical Writer
Tel +45 3880 0721 / +45 3881 0721
Tollosevej 69, DK-2700 Bronshoj
----------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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: Remote proofing
      • From: Graeme Gill <email@hidden>
    • Re: Remote proofing
      • From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
    • Re: Remote proofing
      • From: bruce fraser <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Remote proofing (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: RE: Maximum Chroma vs. Maximum Gamut
  • Next by Date: Re: Maximum Chroma vs. Maximum Gamut
  • Previous by thread: Re: Remote proofing
  • Next by thread: Re: Remote proofing
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread