Re: Profile to standards or press?
Re: Profile to standards or press?
- Subject: Re: Profile to standards or press?
- From: Graeme Gill <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 12:34:51 +1000
- Organization: Color Technology Solutions
Mark Rice wrote:
To see why I am skeptical about profiling or "fingerprinting" presses, go
to http://www.zero1inc.com/Cautions_for_Press_Runs.htm to see a real world
press variability.
From the above URL:
"Here are two pages from the same magazine (to remain unnamed), but different
parts of the press run, showing how much variability can occur in a press run.
If one tries to profile or "fingerprint" a press, what part of the press run
does one choose? I prefer to profile the proof, and the printer should then
be required to match the proof."
This rather ignores the problem of how the proof profile is created, such
that the press can be (easily) made to match it.
One approach is to specifically do a press run for the purposes of profiling.
Take some care to set it up the way you want to run, in terms of quality, cost
of running etc, then profile it. Average more than one chart. Use the profile
as the target for the proofer and for separations. Use the proofer output (which
is presumably more stable than the press) as the visual target for the press operators.
Graeme Gill.
_______________________________________________
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.