Re: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2
Re: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2
- Subject: Re: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 08:59:25 -0700
- Thread-topic: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2
On 1/5/08 8:43 AM, "Todd Shirley" wrote:
> Roger, you hit on the hidden agenda of my original post, which is
> strategies for assigning profiles to untagged CMYK images. Although it
> won't work in all cases, assigning SWOPv2 is usually a decent place to
> start, simply because it is the photoshop default.
In a way, that's like saying, if you have untagged RGB, try sRGB because
'its the default' in Photoshop. And there's some truth to this but more and
more, its not the case. We have a lot more users who should be smart enough
to know to tag their images not using sRGB for so many reasons.
The problem here is what Bruce Fraser used to describe as RGB or CMYK
mystery meat; untagged documents. They are simply evil in any workflow where
you need to share files and not provide the receiving end at least a note
that says "these are in color space X".
> I assigned SWOPv2. After further
> experimentation, I think the main thing to be learned is that plugging
> up shadow detail is a good indicator that I'm not assigning the right
> profile! Any other pointers or tricks that you know of?
Tricks? Other than endlessly trying to Assign different profiles until you
get acceptable color appearance, nope. There lies the evil in untagged
documents. Who provided them and can you inflect some misery onto their end
<g>?
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
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