The Custom CMYK engine [was: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2]
The Custom CMYK engine [was: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2]
- Subject: The Custom CMYK engine [was: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2]
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 23:34:52 -0800
- Thread-topic: The Custom CMYK engine [was: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2]
In a message dated 1/4/08 7:30 PM, Terence Wyse wrote:
> AMEN!
>
> Device Links...we've need support for these for quite some time
> without the need to purchase plug-ins to add this support.
>
> As for the Classic/Custom CMYK engine, I wish they'd offer the ability
> to use real characterization data sets or simply drop the ability to
> build these kludgey CMYK profiles that are of questionable quality for
> real print production.
*My* amen to that, Terry.
Springing from that, I would like to insert an aside into this discussion:
I just finished a job that required me to convert image files from several
RGB spaces (AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB included) to a profile provided by the
printers, created using the Custom (or is it "Cuss-tom", more likely?) CMYK
engine (the name of the profile: "SWOP (Coated), 20%, GCR, Medium":
charming, isn't it...?).
The results were *awful* at first. Huge color shifts and very poor shadow
detail in most cases. Just no "punch" no matter whether I used RelCol or
Perceptual (and I was forced to use Perceptual in most cases due to the
large gamut mismatch between source and target color spaces).
I solved the problem, to a surprisingly large extent if not completely, by
"laundering" the Custom CMYK profile through ProfileMaker, and creating a
much cleaner version of it with exactly the same TAC and very similar GCR.
The results were amazingly superior. Much better color precision, greatly
improved shadow detail and contrast -- all-around better.
And the amazing thing is that the Custom CMYK profile contains 33 CLUT grid
points, and my "laundered" version has "only" 25! And it still beats the
pants off the other one. Goes to show that quality wins over crude and
poorly-conceived quantity.
This relatively simple "laundering" operation saved my butt in this
assignment. And the client is pleasantly surprised with the results. I'm
very pleased and happy, though I still hate that I was forced to work with
that Custom CMYK profile, instead of using a better standard profile like US
Web Coated (SWOP) v2, for example.
Morale: Yes, the Custom CMYK engine *is* crap, in my humble opinion... :-)
It may have had valid reasons for being at the time it was introduced, and
for a few years after that, but it's now hopelessly outdated and clearly
inferior to the available alternatives.
Leaving it in place is of extremely dubious value to print professionals who
aim for quality results. If there are good reasons for keeping it, I would
like to hear them.
Marco Ugolini
_______________________________________________
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