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: Bob Marchant <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 22:13:37 +0000
On 7 Jan 2007, at 18:14, Lee Blevins wrote:
All that pre-supposes that the photographer is in fact in control
of the
project and in communication with the final use of the image.
An idea that is fading as fast as the scanner operator. Perhaps even
faster.
Well Lee , I hate to disappoint you , but that's not the case.
Today the majority of designers I come in contact with get their
images
from online stock photo companies.
For the cheap jobs yes , but not for the serious stuff.
Fewer and fewer images are being contracted directly to photographers.
More library images are being used . That doesn't mean fewer are
being commissioned, because more images are being used overall.
And when they are, their final use is not known.
Err ....yes it is .That's the whole point of us being commissioned
for colour critical campaigns.
This has been a really interesting thread. The photographers have
been branded as uneducated , uncaring , lacking in experience and
knowledge , and of having simian characteristics. We've been told
what we are and not allowed to do. We are unremittingly told about
how our business should be run by 'experts' who obviously know
nothing about the mechanics of the modern day advertising photography
at the high end. Yet should we dare to venture our opinions as to how
the workflow should run , we are shot down because we don't separate
to CMYK using process cameras and film.
Photographers have moved on . We've been responsible for producing
best practice guidelines for digital workflow in an attempt to open
up communication and education . We've promoted open standards and
transparent and non proprietary methods of file exchange. By
comparison we saw doodley squat of any initiatives from the pre
press and press industries until our clients started to see the light.
The desinger has not
yet decided on a printer or the image will be used in a variety of
print
conditions,
The client doesn't commission on a whim . If there are a variety of
print conditions , some as yet unknown , we will tailor our output
accordingly . We can do this because we run a stable colour managed
workflow , a process that is seemingly as yet beyond the reach of our
more enlightened repro colleagues. Yep , we know about the effects of
temperature , humidity , stock , inks blah blah blah on the final
print run , but we have the benefits of FOGRA data to know what is
truly achievable
on a press . The fact that some printers can't match this , and are
happy , or even proud to admit this, is a a real shame for those who
can. We regularly work with pre press houses and printers who have
reached the 21st century and are as outraged as we are at such
attitudes.
some of which don't need a CMYK image at all such as large
format inkjet.
Been there , done that . Do you know how this came about ? By the
majority of 'professional ' shops running their inkjets through
standard cmyk queues on their RIPs and being frightened that an RGB
file might break it , so they told the clients that they would only
accept CMYK. Here in the UK , it's been photographers who have been
advising their clients that their printers need to change their
working practices .Don't forget that the inkjet is our weapon of
choice for our folio and exhibition work , so we know all about
inkjet gamuts.
I don't see any online stock photo companies supplying CMYK images.
Why would you ? Stock photos are not commissioned , so they have no
target.
For basically the same reasons that I don't think the photographer
should either.
A completely false premise.
I don't think the agencies or designers will want to keep going
back to
the photographer for a new image each time they change printers.
They do when they want consistent results.
Not to take the wind out of your sails but I don't think the role
of the
photographer is the commanding role you might portray here.
Commanding ....no . Educated , caring, precise , open ,
communicative , inclusive , inquisitive ,social,
experimental ,consistent ....yes.You choose <BG> . That's why the
work is coming to us.
The idea that it's the printer at fault for not providing a
standardized
process that fits your predefined separation process just doesn't fly.
Think you may have turned over two pages there. We're not asking for
a standardised process to fit our profile , we're asking for the pre
press / print industry to manage their process responsibly in
order that achievable parameters can be defined and relied upon.
Try running and ad in 5 different magazines and then go get them
all and
see if they look the same.
Been there, done that.
They won't. There are far too many variables to printing that SWOP can
characterize.
SWOP ! .
You'd need a profile for every ink/press/paper combination
and then there'd still be more conditions that would affect it.
Can do.
For my money the process of color separating is moving to the prepress
department simply because they have the skills and equipment to do it.
Didn't you just say Try running and ad in 5 different magazines and
then go get them all and see if they look the same.They won't" ?
So we can , but prepress and printers can't ?
I accept that as a photographer you might feel that you are in more
control if you make the separation yourself and have been the
victim of
bad prepress departments who had little knowledge of ICC and butcured
your image.
Thank you
But I have also been the victim of photographers who refuse to
understand that the hues of their image are outside the gamut of the
process and can't seem to accept that nobody did anything wrong.
So , we're all victims. Wouldn't it be better to drop the
preconceptions as to who does what , and work together on achieving
the best results for our clients?
Recently I had to deal with an agency who had an ad shot by a
photographer who chose a lavender background for their image. We tried
to explain to them that they couldn't have chosen a worse color for
CMYK
reproduction.
Erm...much as I'd like to believe it , we don't get to choose. We
suggest , the art director chooses :-). But even given your lavender
background , surely you could find a workaround . We could.
My point being that the photographer isn't being sought out by
printers,
agencies and designers for advice on printing.
Depressingly for some ( many <BG> ) , yes we have been.
You are not seen as the
consultant with all the answers.
Not with all the answers , because I don't believe anybody does have
all the answers .
You're a photographer. Your expertise is in taking pictures.
In the cases where you do make separations, I rarely see a proof
submitted.
Maybe it's the szector of the market that you're dealing with.We ,
along with many of our colleagues , supply proofs as a matter of course.
But that workflow moves the separation process further downstream from
the photographer to either the designer or prepress department, where
IMHO it belongs.
In many cases this is sound thinking , but in many it isn't , because
the client wants their disappointment up front when it comes to RGB
to CMYK conversions . In fact you already made the case for it with
your lavender background scenario.
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