Re: Who does the seperations?
Re: Who does the seperations?
- Subject: Re: Who does the seperations?
- From: Bob Marchant <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:42:24 +0000
On 4 Jan 2007, at 21:38, Kevin Muldoon wrote:
Creating separations is not rocket science but I think everyone
would agree that converting RGB into CMYK involves a level of
responsibility.
Yep.
I believe it makes sense for a photographer to limit his
responsibility and allow the printer to generate the separations
and contract proof that is dialed into his press.
With respect, this is a decision for an individual photographer to
make depending on his/her market. Contrary it would seem to popular
belief , there is more than one kind of photographer (if you exclude
the monkeys that is :-) ). For some of us it makes a great deal of
sense both monetarily and creatively to take more control of the image.
I agree with Andrew Rodney that photographers tend to understand
ICC Color management concepts more easily than prepress guys but
does that mean the photographer wants to attend 6AM press checks
when they should be in Paris on a photo shoot?
If the press is working to ISO standards, or to the specific print
condition that they have sent me , why should I attend a press run.
They've got a proof haven't they ? Got to say though that it can
still be an interesting experience.
BTW , last year I attended a production conference with a session
called "Printing in the Dark". After the initial jokes along the
lines of "I thought all presses ran like that" , there was a sobering
talk about just how accurate a press could be if set up for ISO
standards and then automatically adjusted using sensors along the run
with no intervention from operators. The presenters had surprised
themselves with the accuracy and efficiency achieved.
Or explain why the EPSON they printed doesn't match the Waterproof,
Matchprint, PolaProof or Kodak Approval that the printer made of
their submitted CMYK files?
So what your saying is that if the printer isn' t colour managed ,
that's now the photographer's problem . No surprise there then. Or is
EPSON meant to be a term of contempt <BG>. If it is then, there are
going to be a lot of upset repro houses out there who use them for
their certified proofing devices.
I'd say they could spend their time more constructively and
creatively.
And I'd say that time spent on colour management and CMYK separation
and proofing of my precious originals is both constructive and
creative , and profitable, and part of my responsibility to my
particular client base. They are as fed up as we are with paying 3rd
party push button conversions to incorrect destination spaces , and
then being charged for completely unnecessary "colour correction"
down the line . They are successful agencies and design groups
working on colour critical projects who now see just how efficient
and accurate a properly colour managed workflow can be from
photography to press. They no longer carry the old prejudices so
lovingly welded to the old 'gatekeeper ' practices.
Times have changed . Working practices have changed. The old borders
have become blurred. Some think it's for the worse, some for the
better.. From where we're standing , it's a welcome breath of fresh air.
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