Re: Who does the separations?
Re: Who does the separations?
- Subject: Re: Who does the separations?
- From: Henk Gianotten <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:37:31 +0100
At 13:42 8-1-2007 -0500, Terry Wise wrote:
This brings up one of the, I think, major problems with "late- binding"
workflows where the photographer is simply asked to hand off
tagged RGB and thus relying on the prepress/printer to separate the
image properly to CMYK. The issue is one of Rendering Intents. I
think most of us are aware that there can be up to about three
rendering intents (relative colorimetric ("relcol"), relcol w/ bpc
and perceptual) typically used to convert to CMYK. Choice of
rendering intent can be as much an artistic choice as it is
technical. Who better than the "artist" to know whether one should
sacrifice accuracy and overall saturation (relcol) for a more
"visually" or perceptually pleasing result (perceptual)? I can't see
a prepress operator willing to make that decision so I think this
should simply fall on the photographer in this discussion.
My vote would be for the photographer to make the first conversion
(take the first "hit" to CMYK) to a "standard" CMYK color space
(SWOP2006, GRACoL2006, ISO Coated, whatever) and then, if necessary,
for the printer to make the final conversion to their specific press
conditions, preferably via a device link profile. Certainly the big
hit is that first move from RGB to CMYK with a relatively tiny move
from "standard CMYK" to "press-specific CMYK". In fact, if a printer
is at least adhering to either SWOP2006 specs for solid primaries/
secondaries or ISO 12647-2 for GRACoL2006 and ISO Fogra27/39, the
only adjustment to press-specific conditions should be the different
tone curves.
Would any of the prepress/print folks out there be willing to make
the rendering intent decision or perhaps taking the time to use all
three intents and showing proofs...at no extra cost to the job?
Regards,
Terry Wyse
In our country (Holland) some printers/prepress companies agreed
to use a "single profile" workflow.
They ask the advertising agency or designer to use only the ISOcoated
(fogra27) profile in their files (mostly Certified PDF or PDF/X-3 CMYK
and CMYK Spot).
The printer (or his prepress service provider) makes the new PDF's and
(not always) a new proof.
The largest prepress group uses Alwan technology to transform the files.
They use a DVL-transform system to create new files from ISOcoated to
ISOuncoated, newsprint or any non-standardized device dependent
profile.
This "single profile workflow" is (for some designers and advertising agencies)
a fairly uncomplicated system.
They use standard condition prints (based on Altona Test Kit) to show how
these differences in profiles influences the output.
For non-standardized output conditions a specific Altona print has to be made.
For certain jobs and certain types of work, this is a good solution.
The proof, however, is not free of charge.
For certain editorial stuff they don't proof anymore on paper.
Just soft proofs. For advertisements, in general, a proof is still made.
regards,
Henk
P.S.: The Alwan system is able to check and correct individual images.
I doubt that one would create different rendering intents and proofs at no
charge.
a
_______________________________________________
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