Re: Who does the seperations? (Re: Profile Names and other suggestions)
Re: Who does the seperations? (Re: Profile Names and other suggestions)
- Subject: Re: Who does the seperations? (Re: Profile Names and other suggestions)
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:58:33 -0700
- Thread-topic: Who does the seperations? (Re: Profile Names and other suggestions)
On 1/6/07 8:36 AM, "Lee Blevins" wrote:
> I am on the receiving end of images that photographers create. One
> particular area that I see as a problem is when the photographer creates
> a separation when none was needed.
> In another case I see a photographer who copies paintings converting the
> image to CMYK and sending it to the printer.
Look, both sides can come up with all kinds of examples of boneheaded users
doing stupid things that hose files. It's pointless.
Again, I submit it's vastly easier to train a photographer to produce
acceptable files for output to any device, even a press then it is to train
a prepress person to shoot a job. As yet, I know of no technology that makes
it easy to light a subject well, compose it well and produce an artistic
expression that someone on the receiving end will pay for. On the other
hand, if print shops would conform to print standards or at least keep their
processes under control and supply an ICC profile for that process, any
photographer who understands how to use Photoshop's soft proofing and the
Convert to Profile command can get 90%+ to the goal necessary to reproduce
the image. You want to massage the file? Fine. But let's look at the recent
history of photography, typesetting, prepress and imaging. What's the old
saying? Those who repeat the same mistakes and ignore history are likely to
continue making the same mistakes over and over again.
> The fact that you have an Epson printer calibrated to some standard you
> have chosen has no relevance whatsoever to the conditions that exist at
> a print shop.
As my good friend Bruce Fraser said over the years, printers, at least in
the US don't like to commit to standards but would prefer to exceed them. It
was a classic Bruce-ism that in a kind way says, these shops are all over
the place and are concerned that if they produced the same print standards
as the guy across the street, what competitive advantage would they have
other than price? That scares the s%#t out of them.
As I've said in the past, photographers have been using standardized
processes like C41 and E6 for years. Yes, there are those who like to do
their own processing using exotic home built formulas. But the fact remains
that the outside photo service providers conformed to standard processes for
years and years, something the printing industry needs to pay attention to.
Thankfully SWOP and Gracol are working on this but they can't force a shop
to do something as sensible as maintaining process control based on
standards. If I hear of another shop that dismisses ICC profiles or color
management because their process is so variable I'm going to puke! They have
simply admitted that they are not a supplier. I wish to use Unfortunately
I've been severely burned myself, profiling for a process that enviably
changed from the aim point at a later date, due to this lack of process
control.
> Since most commercial printers don't use SWOP inks and use sheetfed
> presses and not webs the SWOP certified proof isn't relevant to them.
There's absolutely no reason why sheetfed printers can't conform to a
standard print condition and supply a recipe for conversions.
> If you are going to make separations for a printer I hope you would have
> done your homework and got a site specific profile from them and
> contacted their prepress department about conditions relative to their
> environment.
Often, the information isn't available. I recall calling a printer when
building an ICC profile for their process and asking them what TAC they
prefer. Nearly everyone at the shop I talked to didn't have a clue what I
was asking. Only when I got the drum scan operator on the phone, could I
find a person who could supply the answer. Then there are the calls where
the answer is "we print SWOP" when the next thing you find out is, they use
a sheetfed press!
In the old days, when I dropped of my film for processing and asked the lab
to push the film ⅓ of a stop and do a snip test, there was never any
additional discussion necessary. The process, the people running the process
and the customers were all in sync. Sorry but photographers are used to
standard processes.
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
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