Re: Making SWOP TR001 compliant proofs
Re: Making SWOP TR001 compliant proofs
- Subject: Re: Making SWOP TR001 compliant proofs
- From: "Chris McFarling" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:46:08 -0400
So with that said...I'll go back to one of my original questions.
What is the best approach, manually tweak the
FinalProof and the output curves to dial in the device to match the device's
ADS or use our current FinalProof settings and curves (which does not quite
match the ADS) and run all output through an ICC conversion using a profile
such as the Adobe U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2?
And BTW, is there any way to get the TR001 dataset without purchasing a SWOP
kit from swop.org?
In addition to all that, I probably need to answer the question of what
exactly does the customer mean when they say they want proofs that are SWOP
TR001 compliant. How should that be interpreted you think? A proof that
follows the Finalproff ADS guidelines (in our case) or a proof that is
within a couple dE of the TR001 dataset?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Wyse" <email@hidden>
To: "Chris McFarling" <email@hidden>
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: Making SWOP TR001 compliant proofs
> As Rick alluded to, "SWOP" and "TR001" are not necessarily one in the
> same.
>
> You could reasonably say that if your dataset matches the TR001
> dataset within a delta e or 2 (I'm making that part up but 2 dE
> average seems reasonable) that you are "SWOP" complaint.
>
> But what you can't say that if you're printing to SWOP guidelines
> that you're necessarily matching the TR001 dataset. SWOP is basically
> density and TVI guidelines but is less about colorimetry (there's
> SOME colorimetry in there but not much). TR001 is all about colorimetry.
>
> As far as the ADS data is concerned, if you follow the ADS, about all
> you can say is that your proof is SWOP-compliant. It is not likely to
> match TR001 unless you're just plain lucky.
>
> Terry
>
>
>
> On May 23, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Chris McFarling wrote:
>
> > I have the ADS for the Finalproof. All of the info included in it
> > is based
> > on 60# Monterey Gloss stock. I believe that matches the stock used
> > when the
> > SWOP org creted the SWOP specs to begin with, along with the TR001
> > dataset .
> > So if I were to follow the ADS for our Finalproof exactly, then I
> > should end
> > up with a SWOP compliant proof that conforms to the TR001 dataset
> > as well.
> > So in that sense, it seems to me that they are one in the same.
> >
> > So I guess the question is, is the paper, or is the paper not, part
> > of th
> > equation when determining conformance?
> >
> > If they have said that they want TR001 compliant proofs, and if I
> > take that
> > literally, then wouldn't I have to use the 60# Monterey Gloss
> > stock? And
> > wouldn't other vendors of theirs, regardless of their proofing
> > system, have
> > to use the same stock?
>
>
_______________________________________________
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