Re: RGB to CMYK
Re: RGB to CMYK
- Subject: Re: RGB to CMYK
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 20:03:54 -0800
In a message dated 12/7/05 9:11 AM, Denis Gliksman wrote:
> The problem is what happen outside the studio ...
>
> A lot of people say/write " Photographs should stick on RGB delivery ", fine,
> but in reallity it is not so simple...
> How long can we say to our clients: My RGB is good, i don't give you prints,
> CMYK is your problem.
> I couldn't do it more than 3 years ...
It's an age-old problem already, and color-managed procedures haven't even
been around that long yet. "We" (the "bold dreamers") are on one side, with
these shiny new color-management tools, telling the crusty folks on the
prepress and printing side that we have a new cool way to do things. But
they will hear none of it, and sometimes will sabotage you every step of the
way.
So, since they still hold the big guns, we end up with these large bumps on
our craniums from repeatedly banging against their resistance. And they keep
doing their work the same old way, oblivious to our outrage. It's an old
story already...
The sensible thing to do in this kind of situation is to gather as much
information as possible on the type of printing that is going to be used,
convert your RGB file to a CMYK profile that most closely resembles the
expected scenario, and give the prepress people that CMYK file *untagged*
(since they will ignore the embedded profile anyway, most likely). After
that, ask them to give both you and the client a proof of the image(s)
(Cromalin, Matchprint, Approval, whichever they prefer).
Then, if you are religious, pray real hard...
> The difference between RGB and CMYK isn't the only problem, you may have other
> problems that don't come from you either:
>
> When in a catalogue an image is printed at 2 differents places, with a big
> color difference (very often ...), it should help to tell the clients that
> many other parameters may modify the apparence of your image and that the
> photographer has no control on all that ...
You can try telling that to the client, but it may add a middle initial to
your name ("M.", for "Mud"...), since the client may not understand your
explanation, most likely.
> Just to avoid the last point, the client asked me to deliver CMYK to avoid
> surprises ...
These clients: they say the darnedest things... ;)
> My concern is that i know that making a generic CMYK isn't the ideal solution.
> Since i don't have any answer from the printer, my original question was: "is
> there a better/safer CMYK to use when you have no information".
A "generic" CMYK in the U.S. may be seen as what is represented by U.S. Web
Coated (SWOP) v2, whereas in Europe it may be Europe ISO Coated FOGRA27. But
there is no "generic" CMYK that transcends boundaries.
A short answer to your question ("is there a better/safer CMYK to use when
you have no information?") in your case may be: Europe ISO Coated FOGRA27.
But it may prove problematic for flexo or gravure or newspaper output.
Coming from Europe myself though living in the U.S., I am very curious to
know what others in this forum think would be best in Europe for situations
where the output is unknown and a CMYK file is requested.
> On the 4800, printing from euroscale or Iso Fogra27 converted files doesn't
> seems to make any difference.
> (At least for these images)
Still, whether or not the output is very similar, it's probably better to
proof to the latest standards.
Best regards.
--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
_______________________________________________
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