Re: Cross rendering question
Re: Cross rendering question
- Subject: Re: Cross rendering question
- From: Dennis Dunbar <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 12:41:48 -0700
Nathan,
What I was doing was trying to make a profile of their proofer. So the
file was sent to them untagged because I wanted to use the target to
profile their proofer without any additional conversions.
After the profile was made I then assigned this profile to a copy of
the original file so I could check the accuracy of the profile. If the
profile were accurate then there should be a good match between the
file on screen (with the new profile) and the proof. Since it's hard to
evaluate the match when it's just a series of patches I included an
image in the file and that is what I was looking at when evaluating the
profile.
On screen appearance is one factor, being able to reproduce a print on
my in-house printer that is "close enough" is another factor. And that
is where I was having problems. After checking the paper and
discovering that it has flourescent brighteners in it I understood why
I was having problems producing a match on my in-house printer.
I've followed this path many times and have had good results. Since I
am making these profiles for our own use I find it's much easier to get
them to agree to run a single page on their proofer than 3 or 4 pages,
so I use the letter sized target and include a test image so I can do
an instant evaluation.
If I sent them the profiling target as an L*a*b file there would be
colorspace conversions that would invalidate the profile. And because I
wanted to check the profile, not my ability to convert to it I assigned
the newly made profile to the original file instead of converting from
my default space to this profile.
This is the first time I've run into the UV issue. Now I know what all
the discussion on that's been about.
Thanks!
Dennis Dunbar
On Jun 28, 2005, at 12:03 PM, email@hidden
wrote:
No, the source profile should absolutely be known. If it isn't then
neither
you nor Photoshop have any idea how the color numbers in that file are
supposed to be interpreted, and the default working space will
typically be
assumed. Choosing a profile at random to tag it with just because you
think
it needs one doesn't make any sense, but if you absolutely had to, you
should at least pick an input or working space profile that might have
some
slim chance of being close to correct (probably starting at sRGB and
working
your way up until it looks right). Printers do not make computer
files, they
make pictures on paper, so profiles made from and for printers should
not be
assigned to image files that were produced by a scanner, camera or
computer
(as would be the case for screenshots, original illustrations and
printer
targets generated by profiling software) if you're after color
accuracy.
Doing this looks absolutely horrible
_______________________________________________
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