Re: To UV or not
Re: To UV or not
- Subject: Re: To UV or not
- From: "Mike Eddington" <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:47:30 -0400
- Thread-topic: To UV or not
>>Did some more work with a DTP70 today.
>>
>>Made a press profile with UV excitation included.
>>
>>Made two proofer profiles, one with and one without UV excitation.
>>
>>Press paper coordinate is 92, 0, -2 (no characteristics hump at
440nm).
>>
>>I iterated both proofer profiles to a less than 1 deltaE average.
>>
>>Visually?
>>
>>To my eyes and those of my colleagues, the proofer profile made with
UV
>>excitation better matches the press sheet. What can I say?
[]
I'm assuming here that "UV Excitation included" means the measurement
data was derived from a UV filtered device? I Have a hard time following
the terminology as well ;-) Either way though, wouldn't it be logical
that the best results would come from the workflow where the press
target data, and proofer data are both measured with the same
filtration? That has been my experience (for the most part anyway). Have
you tried a press profile with UV excitation excluded? I would expect
the proofer profile with UV excitation excluded to be closer in that
case, no? Does your proofing stock contain FWAs?
Michael Eddington
North American Color, Inc.
www.nac-mi.com
_______________________________________________
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