Re: Photographers, printers, and proofs
Re: Photographers, printers, and proofs
- Subject: Re: Photographers, printers, and proofs
- From: Bob Marchant <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 10:57:27 +0100
On 19 Apr 2008, at 06:36, Mike Strickler wrote:
Both proof makers and buyers need to pay close attention to the
following:
All proofs for offset should be demonstrably compliant with the
chosen standard (e.g., GRACoL, SWOP, FOGRA), whether the proofing
system and media are officially blessed or not. Confirmation of a
good proofing system is NOT a GRACoL or SWOP logo but a print of a
proofing test form that includes the IT8.7-4 profiling chart along
with test patterns and images that demonstrate good gray balance
and tonal reproduction for visual assessment. The IT8.7-4 chart
should be read, with the data compared to the official
characterization data set, and DeltaE values should be within ISO
12647-7 tolerances. This test should be done at regular intervals,
but particularly when the media or other system components have
changed, or when buying proofs from a new source. For process
control every proof should have the new Idealliance ISO 12647-7
control strip--within the image area so it is color managed with
the rest of the proof. The strip must be read, not merely
displayed, and results confirmed in a report that accompanies each
proof. Remember, certified systems can produce lousy proofs just
like uncertified systems, so insist on evidence that the proof
really passes muster.
Hi Mike
Fully agree with the above , but if it's a decent proofing device ,
I'd expect the DeltaE values to be tighter the ISO 12647-7 tolerances.
I totally agree that creative professionals can benefit hugely from
in-house proofing systems (including most importantly good soft-
proofing), but the commitment goes beyond merely installing a
suitable system. It must also be maintained, and it may not be
realistic to expect that the time and knowledge (or the purchase of
a fast strip-reading spectro) necessary for this will be available
at a studio or agency.
Why not ? If it's a reasonable investment as a lone photographer ,
surely it's not beyond a design group to have the same.
The RIP manufacturers have tired hard to make recalibration
friendly, but we're still finding that in practice it gets put
aside far too often, even in many printing companies. So the budget
usually must include the services of a qualified consultant who
will keep everything in tune.
I appreciate the need for consultants in many areas, especially
initial set ups , education and building custom profiles for those
who are not especiallly CM savvy , but it shouldn't be beyond the
capabilities of designers to linearise their proofer now and then. It
may be that it's more effective cost wise for some agencies / design
groups to outsource this , but as a sole trader photographer , the
numbers don't stack up quite so convincingly ,and it just has to be
a matter of climbing that steep learning curve <BG>.
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
- Prev by Date:
Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- Next by Date:
Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- Previous by thread:
Re: Photographers, printers, and proofs
- Next by thread:
Re: Photographers, printers, and proofs
- Index(es):