Re: Profilemaker_ImagePrint_Epson9600
Re: Profilemaker_ImagePrint_Epson9600
- Subject: Re: Profilemaker_ImagePrint_Epson9600
- From: Steve Upton <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 10:49:49 -0800
I am in full agreement with Andrew on this one and I want to add a few bits.
At 11:57 AM -0500 3/18/04, Kevin Casey wrote:
>
I need some advice, suggestions or information resources. I work in an advertising agency as the digital imaging technician. As such my responsibility (and my challenge) is to make sure that all images reproduce correctly (or at least pleasantly!)
>
regardless of output. I am on a G4 with a self-calibrating Apple display.
these are nice but I have always found that an instrument will improve the calibration & profile - just something to keep in mind
>
I carefully watch my CMYK numbers (my background is Commercial printing in a closed -loop environment) and I've been proofing on an Epson 9600, with profiles built using
>
I want to send targets to my print vendors and have them output on their proofing devices (the contract-level proofs that they are charged with matching on press), send me the proof so I can build profiles to employ in soft and hard-proofing. As
>
I've had little training with the Profilemaker software suite or with my other peripheral devices I'm a bit uncertain as to how to proceed. The Profilemaker documentation is less than straightforward. I think I need to use the TC3.5 CMYK.tif target
>
to send to my vendors.
Yeah, you can certainly go bigger than the 3.5. We often use the 6.02 because the physical size is nice. ECI is probably best if you can fit it on.
When you get the contract proof made for profiling, include a handful of good CMYK images on the _same page_. If it means you need to pay more for a larger proof do it!
Save the digital CMYK images in an archival form (burn a CD if necessary). Having done this you will actually have a method of evaluating your proofs! This may sound silly but how else are people visually evaluating proofs?
After you build your CMYK and inkjet profiles, push the CMYK images through your new proofing system and then compare them (under controlled lighting) to your reference proofs. You will be able to see very clearly how close a match you are getting.
>
Does anyone out there operate under similar circumstances? I'd like to benefit from your experience. I'd like to get my Epson to operate as a SWOP device so I can predict with reasonable accuracy what my images are going to look like when they hit
>
press. I know that Epson 9600 is SWOP-certified but I'm not sure I need to go that route.
SWOP is an OK aim point but without a certified SWOP press sheet and the digital images that were used on the sheet you don't have an effective point of comparison.
Incidentally the set of digital CMYK images, reference proof and proof profile can also be used to evaluate scanning and display system accuracy.
Regards,
Steve
________________________________________________________________________
o Steve Upton CHROMiX www.chromix.com
o (hueman) 866.CHROMiX
o email@hidden 206.985.6837
o ColorGear ColorThink ColorValet ColorSmarts ProfileCentral
________________________________________________________________________
--
_______________________________________________
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.