Re: Theoretical CMYK Profile
Re: Theoretical CMYK Profile
- Subject: Re: Theoretical CMYK Profile
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 21:15:33 -0400
Dear Daniel,
> I was reading an article in Photoshop user about image sharpening and the
> author discussed the option of a CMYK profile that was custom designed to
> have ink limits and purity that encompassed the entire RGB colorspace.
To me, "RGB" is not an absolute in itself. As used in the above sentence
"the entire RGB colorspace", it would suggests that there exists an abstract
entity dubbed "the entire RGB colorspace", indeed the mother of all RGB
colorspace, that would represent "RGB colors" in an absolute sense. Because
RGB colors are by definition relative to some set of RGB primaries, white
point and gamma, the notion of "the entire RGB colorspace" becomes vague and
impossible to cast into some kind of real device definition. So, if this
author uncovered a "CMYK profile that have ink limits and purity that
encompasses the entire RGB colorspace", I'd like to know more.
> I am
> curious about how this converison would affect the colors of an originally
> RGB image and why a CMYK space would be used instead of lab in this case.
You have to realize that RGB and Lab are practically interchangeable as far
as color encoding is concerned. To convert an image to CMYK, from some RGB
colorspace or from Lab is, for all intents and purposes, equivalent. For the
purpose of *editing*, however, RGB and Lab are not interchangeable,
otherwise Photoshop would not built around such an incredibly rich RGB
feature set (don't get me wrong, there are color editors that are superior
to Photoshop and are Lab-based , but that's besides the point).
> The author seemed to be a big fan of the CMYK *K channel, but similar
> effects can be created using the *L channel.
The "K" is the "key" as they say in the print world. That's true. But again,
realize that some authors swear by one kind of color management practice
while others swear by a completely different one. Personnally, I feel
completely agnostic as to preaching one over the other. I tend to like
colorimetry a lot but I'm not crazy, I'll use what allows me to get the job
done as easily as possible with the least efforts while getting the best
results. It's all a matter of compromise and how much you're willing to
tolerate, you or your clients. But, yes, colorimetry is here to stay and it
is worth learning. That's my bias.
> Take it easy
>
> Dan
Regards,
Roger Breton | Laval, Canada | email@hidden
http://pages.infinit.net/graxx
_______________________________________________
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