Re: Supplied RGB
Re: Supplied RGB
- Subject: Re: Supplied RGB
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 10:36:32 -0400
I agree, Ideally, as a photographer, I'd like to have some control of
the final outcome of the image I've been engaged to produce.
In practice and at least in my case, my images may run in numerous
different publications and the logistics become impossible. Dealing
with the shop that produces the contract proof is most often a very
hurried affair. Advertising Agencies especially have a modus operandi
to wait till the deadline is impossibly close and we always bail them
out, so they never learn and it makes for very difficult working
conditions. Although there is supposed to be a SWOP standard - I see no
evidence of that in the reproduced pages. Colors and tonalities vary
wildly. I often talk to prepress people and I get the impression that
color management is not implemented, but for a few shops (I've only
heard of them though this list). I hear of trouble with numerous
variants etc., but if I may be somewhat rude - I see a profit motive in
having to manipulate files and producing numerous proofs.
I've visited enough shops to have the impression that many operators
sit at monitors that are not calibrated and are bathed in fluorescent
light with reflections from windows and are often aged dim CRTs with a
layer of soot on them. I got called in on a problem, where i was blamed
for a "bad file". I suggested to the person at the computer to reopen
the file and NOT "ignore the profile". Suddenly the file was working
much better.....
I've heard other photographers tell a variant of this story....
I dont mind if the prepress people keep the profit from converting RGB
files as long as they become part of the greater world and dont ignore
color management. I continue to submit RGB files along with
conversions to SWOP, or when the information is given, to the printers
profile or specs and a "validation print" and when time allows a proof
- "approval" or such "standard" digital proof.
Formulating standards and education is a good idea and so I would
support "idealliance" and such efforts and hope that it can go further
than a simple recommendation as to resolution....
I for one plan to give them input....
ulf skogsbergh
On Wednesday, May 26, 2004, at 09:51 AM, Andrew Rodney wrote:
having the creator of
the image handle the conversions seems to be hearsay. I on the other
hand
like to see Photographers who wish to control the process (and charge
for
it) have the ability to do this. Yes getting the information is often
like
getting blood from a rock. If you know who's going to produce the
contract
proof, a target sent, measured and a custom profile built usually
results in
conversions that are superior and allow the photographer control and
profits
(as well as allowing those useful cross rendered prints on the desktop
Epson
in the studio).
Also nobody wants to pay me for that work.
Ah, that's a big problem (but not one based upon technology). A
photographer
can produce a CMYK conversion as good (and I'd say based on their
ability to
judge the color of their own images, better) than a great deal of print
houses.
_______________________________________________
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.