Re: 18% grey
Re: 18% grey
The workflow that performs better than any other for me is to convert
from scanner/camera profile to 2.46 using relative colorimetric, and
then Assign the contrast specific to the photographer's intentions,
portrait/fashion/bold saturated. This seems both scientifically and
artistically to achieve the most accurate and most pleasing
reproduction at the same time.
As you know, pixels get converted with the input profile conversion to
2.46, but assigning the print contrast of 1.8/2.0/2.2, specific to the
subject intent only affects the on-screen preview, while maintaining
the gamut integrity and lastly "contrast masking" the image in
preparation for the output profile/printed image.
I have been using this method since Photoshop 6 beta and have taught
some of the most recognized photographers this paradigm. Seems to work
well for all.
- Jon
On Apr 9, 2005, at 8:50 AM, Roger Breton wrote:
A 2.4 gamma does not play well with the usual monitor or synthetic
space
suspects of 2.2 and 1.8.
GrafixGear
8 West Glen Avenue
Ridgewood, NJ 07450
(201) 447-1510
email@hidden
http://www.GrafixGear.Com
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
| References: | |
| | >Re: 18% grey (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |