Re: Rel vs Abs proofs
Re: Rel vs Abs proofs
- Subject: Re: Rel vs Abs proofs
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 21:16:04 -0400
Rich,
> I don't follow you here, Roger. I'm just suggesting a test. Different
> engines are gonna' handle the color transforms differently, and
> profiles are gonna' have varying characteristics.
The "different strokes for different folks" methodology. I respect that.
> So, see which one
> works "best". And you can open the whole chromatic adaptation can of
> worms here.
I wouldn't dare.
> If you'll allow a couple of other generalizations:
>
> 1) It's been my experience that clients don't respond well to the
> paper simulation of an absolute colorimetric transform.
I wonder why. Is it visceral? Or some abstract idea of what a proof ought to
be they (somehow) formed (over the years).
> 2) If you perform an absolute colorimetric transform, you MUST be
> using a raster file - otherwise you'll have regions of paper
> simulation and regions without.
Good point. Thank's for reminding me. We should be putting this on the
www.color.org proofing FAQ.
> 3) If your proofing device is not a variable droplet device (or
> something that can execute really, really fine screens), you can
> probably forget about using an absolute colorimetric transform -
> it'll just be too grainy.
Like an Epson 3000?
> Guess this is why GMG gives some options on the paper simulation.
What a RIP! I wish I was rich...
> Rich Apollo
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