• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Spectro #'s vs PS #'s
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Spectro #'s vs PS #'s


  • Subject: Spectro #'s vs PS #'s
  • From: Busher Jr Richard C <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:23:52 -0700

Let's assume we are working in a specific output device color space, say US Sheetfed Coated v2. We create a number of color patches in PS (CS3). One of the patches is Lab = 000 (black) (= 95, 85, 85, 85 cmyk in this color space). One of the patches is Lab = 100,0,0 (white) = 0,0,0,0 cmyk. We arbitrarily create a number of additional color patches in cmyk, and PS tells us what the Lab values are for these colors (the device independent colors).

I now print this file to my proofer. I do this by converting the cmyk file (US Sheetfed Coated v2) to the color space of my proofer (Epson 9800, K3 inks, Epson Standard Proofing Paper, ColorBurst rip profiled for ink and paper) using relative intent and black point compensation.

The objective is to print this file in a manner that represents what this file will look like when printed on a 4-color printing press that has been adjusted to the US Sheetfed Coated v2 standard. In other words, I'm hoping to create a proof that is a match for the press sheet if the press is suitably calibrated.

Now, in reality, Lab = 100,0,0 is not attainable. The press sheet (and the proof sheet) is never color neutral. And an L* = 100 is not attainable. In the same vein, L* = 0 is not attainable with ink on paper, even though ab = 0,0 is attainable. Generally, L* = 95 is reasonable for white, and L* = 8 or so is reasonable for black.

My first goal is to figure out how to adjust the file L* values of the PS file so that I can analyze the measured results, i.e compare them to the measured results from my spectrophotometer. My ultimate goal is to come up with a method to verify that my proof is an accurate representation of what I should get from the final output device.

What I have been getting is proof results that are remarkable close to the theoretical PS Lab numbers in the a and b values, except, of course, for L values close to white. If I factor in the paper white ab values the results are basically right on. However the measured L* values are somewhat off. I'd like to create a curve adjustment to the L* channel in PS that creates an accurate model of what I should reasonable expect to see on the proof, and on the press sheet, etc.

Is a simple raising of the L* = 0 to an L* = x, and a simple lowering of L* = 100 to L* = y, resulting in a new straight line curve, appropriate?

Dick Busher
Cosgrove Editions
7042 20th Place NE
Seattle WA  98115

206-524-6726
888-507-7375
email@hidden

_______________________________________________
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


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Spectro #'s vs PS #'s
      • From: Klaus Karcher <email@hidden>
    • Re: Spectro #'s vs PS #'s
      • From: Thomas Holm/pixl <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
  • Next by Date: Re: Ambient correction
  • Previous by thread: Re: maclife.de
  • Next by thread: Re: Spectro #'s vs PS #'s
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread