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: Bob Marchant <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:44:15 +0000
On 29 Nov 2005, at 16:04, Rolf Gierling wrote:
Bob, just to be curious. Why do you think the needs differ between the
Periodical Publishers
Association in the UK and the ones in "germany" that led to these
profiles? (FOGRA, bvdm etc.)
How European are these profiles?
Hi Rolf.
Last PPA recommended the use of the ECI profiles for colour
separation in the absence of any defined target or supplied
profile.These are of course based on FOGRA data, so in theory no
difference there.
This year there will be PPA icc profile for glossy magazines , with
the ECI profiles being recommended for other paper grades.
As to any dissatisfaction with the ECI profiles , there are a couple of
areas that come to mind. The PPA has agreed on a spec of 310% TAC ,95%
max K , medium GCR and a black start at 35.
The ECI webcoated profile has a much longer black , max K 100% and TAC
I believe of 300%. In my experience it also produces some anomalies in
super saturated blues , and a certain loss of detail in saturated
greens when used with relative colorimetric rendering .When using
perceptual rendering it produces an overall lack of saturation
(slightly more than I would expect). but , as Paul Sherfield has
pointed out , the numbers seem to stack up , and the majority of the
committee are happy to endorse the ECI profiles for some of the paper
grades.
The PPA profile is being made available to bring the present
proof4press standard and pic4press into alignment. At present , the
publishers preferred proofing space for glossy magazines is based on
the DP10 standard from DuPont ( although there are a large number of
PPA accredited proofing devices other than the Digital Cromalin).
Photographers and other individuals / organisations will be able to use
this profile for softproofing, aim prints ,separation and proofing in
the absence of any defined target or supplied profile.
In all the above circumstances , these recommendations are made in the
absence of any other defined / preferred / supplied profile. This is
because we are not setting narrow and confining standards , but
producing best practice guidelines. Anybody who has the necessary
equipment and skills can produce their own CMYK as long as it fits
within these guidelines.
Amongst all the other stuff that takes up too much room in our studio ,
we have the luxury of a Spectrolino and Profilemaker 5 , so we take
full advantage of the options that are available, ( as outlined in
previous messages...... we can play with black generation, ink limits ,
chroma etc to suit different images).We also find that the profiles we
produce using the FOGRA data suit our type imagery better than the ECI
profiles , ,but that of course is a personal opinion.
As to how European these profiles are , then the answer has to be
British , as the PPA deals with UK publishers . As an individual , I
would of course respect other CMYK definitions and supply accordingly.
Sorry for the long(ish) answer to a short question .
Sorry for the blue nose, but you chose to make the stress on photo and
not, what I did,
on the graphic-(designer)-industry.
No problem,,,just a little sensitive I guess :-)
I know that a lot of photographers are able to
(color)-manage their Epsons, HPs and Canons ;-)
And Sinars of course , our present camera of choice.
Regards,
Bob Marchant.
_______________________________________________
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