Re: British Publications & ISO Standards
Re: British Publications & ISO Standards
- Subject: Re: British Publications & ISO Standards
- From: Bob Marchant <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:23:03 +0000
On 13 Feb 2007, at 21:24, Martin Orpen wrote:
I've always been very vocal in my criticisms of "standards" that
are guided by manufacturers like DuPont and Agfa et al - because
they are very rarely beneficial to those of us who want openly
understood quality standards.
Hi Martin.
I agree entirely.
The documentation for Pass4Press and Pic4Press were excellent
because they were clear, concise and provided relatively
independent advice about production methods and concept of "best
practice".
They were greatly benefitted by those outside the committees who took
the time to help with the beta versions put out for comment. Your
input for pic4press was ( and still is ) greatly appreciated. You
got the hard work , but none of the recognition.
I wholeheartedly support the move to ISO and would also add my
support to any further moves that increase the skills and knowledge
of the people at the publications who deal with the data and proofs
that we supply them.
And that is entirely the kind of support needed.
They don't need to train their staff in colour management or press
control.
How I wish they did. Recent traffic on one of the imaging lists shows
how , despite all the info out there , there is still a pitiful lack
of understanding of the process . This would have been slightly more
palatable had the magazine in question not been from one of the
publishing houses who are signatories to pic4press. Horse and water
come to mind :-) .
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