Epson 2200 and Ultrachrome
Epson 2200 and Ultrachrome
- Subject: Epson 2200 and Ultrachrome
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:32:55 -0800
At 10:29 AM 3/21/2004, Bob Rushing wrote:
>
So here I was beating my head against a hard subject
>
trying to find this magical solution when it is now obvious to me it's
>
what the client wants. I would go crazy trying to get the the color
>
"just right" and all along, the client liked the print that they
>
thought was most pleasing - not most accurate. When asked why, they
>
responded "I like the color on this one" or "this one has nicer color"
>
(pointing to the print made with the Epson driver). Than again, this is
>
explained in "Real World Color Management" because after reading the
>
book, it now makes sense to me. My own artwork however, is another
>
story. But artistic expression is an different animal than photographing
>
people and events for hire.
>
>
I checked into some of the RIP drivers and they are too expensive for me
>
right now. And I too don't like or use the Epson Vivid color option. I
>
think it's horrible but, to each his own. Plus, what this forum has
>
shown me is that first you have to start with a calibrated monotor. No
>
ifs, ands or buts. Calibrate that monitor. And if you can't, go buy one
>
you can calibrate.
Bob, I understand very well your point regarding "pleasing color" vs.
"accurate color": as an artist you are very attuned to what is pleasing to
you as well as to your clients.
But if the purpose of calibrating and profiling your monitor, then
calibrating and profiling your printer, is to obtain color that does not
shift from one device to the next and is predictable, you are undermining
the integrity of the process when you insert a factory-provided profile for
the printer into the procedure. You recommend that people calibrate and
profile their monitors, and that I strongly agree with. But my point is that
the benefits of such a precaution fully accrue only when you control ALL
aspects of the process to the fullest extent possible.
Furthermore, and this is a problem acutely felt in professional design
environments, when you provide the client with a "pleasing" print versus an
"accurate" one, you are presenting results to him (or her) which very likely
will reproduce differently on press, should that image end up printed on a
magazine or brochure. And the client will then ask you: "Why does the image
look so different from what you showed me?" (i.e., less saturated, less
vivid, with slight but noticeable hue shifts, etc.). If that happens often
enough, your reputation will suffer somewhat, and you may get to be known as
the one who can't quite "get it right."
When you know that an image is going to press, it's a good idea, first and
foremost, to show the client a proof of what it will come out like on press.
If you are dying to show them a "pleasing" print, beware, since you may be
undermining yourself: the client will fall in love with THAT one and want it
to look just like that on the magazine, like a child wants candy, impervious
to any reasons why that cannot be matched on a printed sheet.
In friendship.
--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
_______________________________________________
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.