Re: eci ISO Coated vs. Adobe Europe ISO Coated
Re: eci ISO Coated vs. Adobe Europe ISO Coated
- Subject: Re: eci ISO Coated vs. Adobe Europe ISO Coated
- From: Henk Gianotten <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 00:39:02 +0100
At 17:14 25-11-2005 +0100, Rolf Gierling wrote:
I am not really interested in what the "EuropeISOCoatedFOGRA27.icc" from Adobe
is or how it performs. The FOGRA or the ECI are the organisations that count
to printers. They believe in what is written in the Medienstandard Druck,
and it's written ISOcoated in there.
Maybe one of these profiles performs a little bit better than the other,
but does that really count if it introduces some "Convert to profile"?
Working as a colormanagement "teacher" for more than 9 years, it has been
difficult enough to decribe why we need AdobeRGB, sRGB, ColorMatchRGB
NTSC, ECIRGB and so on. I believe, none of my clients really got it, and it is
still interesting to see that the settings we made lasted for about 2
weeks until
they were gone to something else.
Most choose what they believe is fine, and do "Convert to profile" if they
find themself working together with other people with other settings.
Now the game goes on in European printing.
Euroscale Coated. Hard enough to tell someone that this profile really
does not
have something in common with european printing conditions today.
EuropeISOCoatedFOGRA27? Is Quark the next to "invent" a new profile?
I wish that all that people would come together and agree to one standard
profile,
one web-adress where to download it.
In the hope that all those graphics people out there wouldn't have to
spend hours
in setting up their colormanagement workflow and in favour of high quality.
This is what Paul Schilliger is talking about. He is confused. And he is
right to be so.
Rolf
Adobe agreed a while ago that they would deliver the ECI profiles as part
of their standard set of profiles in one of the next versions of CS2.
They will deliver the original ECI-profiles plus the Adobe generated
profiles based on the Fogra 27, 28, 29 and 30 characterization data.
Users can select the profiles they prefer in their workflow.
I agree that the 'original' profiles perform better.
However, I agree too, that a number of designers and other suppliers of
digital files still prefer a shorter black. And even a number of European
printers prefer the shorter black.
They seem to work in an environment where a less stable process is still
needed.
Or in other words: They still seem to need all the correction tools on
their press.
I agree that the presses are far to expensive to be used for these kind of
corrections, but some printers still request those tools.
It will take some more years of training and explaining why separations
with the longer blacks result in a more stable printing process.
I think that standardizing on these four Fogra characterization data sets
is a great improvement for all designers and all printers.
We finally can agree on the ISO 2846 inks and on the characterization data.
That step is difficult enough for a lot of non-German printers.
In Germany (and Switzerland and Austria) you can rely on the documentation
provided by Fogra, ECI and BVDM. All clearly described in German documents
such as Praxis Standard Offset and Medien Standards Druck 2004. Only the
Altona Test Suite documentation is now available in English. So non-German
speaking designers, lithographers and printers lack the English (and
Spanish, and Russian, and Portugesian etc. etc.) version.
BVDM promised to make the MedienStandard Print 2005 available in the
English language to be released somewhere in 2006. Such a document will
help the others to accept and implement the standards we need.
As soon as we all agree on the ISO/Fogra sets, Paul and others will have
less problems.
I think,
Henk
_______________________________________________
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