Re: PS CMYK Conversions
Re: PS CMYK Conversions
- Subject: Re: PS CMYK Conversions
- From: Terence Wyse <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:10:51 -0400
On Aug 15, 2008, at 1:41 PM, Robert Rock wrote:
I'm a bit confused with the converting/assigning back and forth:
Let's say that after color correcting we convert to the UNLAM
profile and
proof one last time. Client says OKAY.
Just to be clear, you DON'T show the client the UNLAM proof, you show
them the LAM proof because that represents the final results. You
proof the LAM image using the UNLAM profile as a guide (only) for your
pressroom to hit. Once this gets lamintated, it should them look like
the LAM proof. The UNLAM proof should not go to the customer since it
represents what the image looks like PRIOR to lamination and may look
kind of whacky (oversaturated and possibly too light, just as a guess).
Now we have the image/file that has
already been converted to the UNLAM profile.
If you went with workflow #2 (LAM image/LAM proof to start with), you
DON'T convert to the UNLAM profile from the LAM profile; you leave the
image as "LAM" and then proof as UNLAM for the pressroom since that
will represent what the LAN image looks like WITHOUT the lamination.
Why would we have to also
ASSIGN the profile prior to converting to the LAM profile? If it's
already
been converted to the UNLAM profile, would ASSIGNING be redundant and
unnecessary?
If you EMBEDDED the LAM profile, you wouldn't have to assign the
profile which would be redundent as you say. I said ASSIGN since I
never assume the person I'm talking to knows what embedding a profile
means or if they are doing that by default. Many prepress/print folks
don't know anything about embedding a CMYK profile and, in fact, if
they do they view it as a BAD THING (go figure).
As for "proofing the converted LAM image using the UNLAM profile in
the
proofing RIP", how exactly would this be done? Is this the same as
what
results when you use absolute colorimetric as your rendering intent?
I guess
what I'm asking is how to be crystal clear with the prepress people
when I
give them this workflow.
If I knew what your proofing system consisted of, I could give you a
more precise answer. If you have a proofing RIP (ColorBurst, GMG,
etc.) driving and inkjet printer (Epson, HP , etc.), I could get very
specific.
I guess I assumed you WERE prepress. If this scenario we're discussing
is going to eventually be handed off to a prepress dept., it could get
ugly, especially if they are unfamiliar with ICC profiles and
workflow. If they're generating the proofs for you, you'll need to get
familiar with their system or at least explain what you're trying to
do. They may "get it" or they may not. If not, the only way may be for
you to produce the proofs yourself. If this sounds overly pessimistic
in regards to the prepress folks, it's only because as a color
management consultant I work with prepress and pressrooms all the time
and find there's a general lack knowledge of color management
workflows. It's not always the case but it is more often than not.
And if you're not prepress, how/where are you getting the laminated/
unlaminated press sheets from which to profile and work from? This
needs to be a fairly controlled process and if you're simply sending
them a profile testchart to print and asking them to save laminated
and unlaminated press sheets, I wouldn't be very hopeful about getting
good results.
If there's any way I can help, please let me know,
Terry Wyse
_____________________________
WyseConsul
Color Management Consulting
G7 Certified Expert
wyseconsul at mac dot com
704.843.0858
_______________________________________________
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