Re: No More RGB/Taking a CMYK delivery on
Re: No More RGB/Taking a CMYK delivery on
- Subject: Re: No More RGB/Taking a CMYK delivery on
- From: "jc castronovo" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 08:55:26 -0400
Thanks for the clarification and your support, Terry.
I can see now that there are places in the workflow where embedded profiles
should be ignored, but that only means that it's the printer's
responsibility to make sure that they ARE ignored when it's appropriate to
do so. Why do others have to conclude that it's wrong to embed a CMYK
profile, just so that there's LESS chance that the printer can screw it up?
To pick an extreme example, doesn't it come in handy at some point, if a
conversion was made with newsprint in mind, that there's a profile attached
to indicate that intent? If that file winds up being printed on newsprint,
all would be fine without a profile. But if the file goes elsewhere,
hopefully someone will notice how bad it is and the guessing begins. If the
picture is abstract, there's no hope of guessing correctly.
I haven't had it happen yet, but I never want to hear that a job was printed
poorly because a profile was embedded. Yet, I've seen plenty of cases where
the opposite was true. Maybe I'm naive, but by now I expect professionals to
understand when to use them and when not to based on where that person is in
the chain. Yet there's this opposition to embedding, and the blame shifting
has found it's way right up the line into Adobe's default CMYK settings for
CS: don't preserve and don't embed. We're going backwards.
john c.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terence L. Wyse"
>
I guess some of this depends on what you mean by "RIP". If I understand
>
you correctly John, you probably mean the front-end RIP (RAMpage,
>
Nexus, Apogee, Prinergy, et al). This is definitely NOT the place for
>
some sort of blind in-RIP profile conversion in my opinion. In fact,
>
I'd say very few workflows should be doing any sort of blind conversion
>
on the way to the film/platesetter. The risks would be enormous.
>
>
If it's proofing RIPs, it becomes a bit of a gray area. IN GENERAL if
>
you're a printing company, you would not want your proofing RIP to
>
honor embedded profiles but instead discard the embedded profile and
>
effectively assign it your press profile, that way you're seeing on the
>
proof how the job will actually print. That's, after all, the whole
>
purpose of any contract proof, inkjet, analog or otherwise. The one
>
case I can see for a printer honoring a profile at the proofing stage
>
is if you want to see what the customer INTENDED their job to look
>
like. That'd be a case for setting up a separate queue in the proof RIP
>
to honor embedded profiles.
>
>
If you're NOT the printer then you may ALWAYS want the proofing RIP to
>
honor profiles. Depends where you're at in the food chain.
>
>
BTW, I sit on the sidelines a lot and cheer you on on that other list.
>
You're a brave soul to take that heat; just know that there are others
>
on that list that agree with you 100% that don't always take the time
>
to jump into the fray.
_______________________________________________
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.