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: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:12:12 -0800
- Thread-topic: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP)v2 vs. SWOP2006_Coated5v2
In a message dated 1/5/08 1:55 PM, Paul Foerts wrote:
> It would be more productive to stimulate the revision of the CMYK engine and
> to promote profile editing in Photostop in the meantime...
Revise the Custom CMYK engine? How? Exactly in which way?
Promote profile *editing*? So that countless numbers of people who in the
first place are already clueless on how to use profiles properly, are given
a loaded gun with the compliments of the house, and are now free to mess at
their clueless leisure with profiles (custom or standard, many of which were
made with painstaking precision and effort), thus creating little
Franken-profiles which will then multiply across the electronic universe
like a disease? With most of them probably having *the same name* as the
original *unedited* standard profile, just to add the final touch to the
utter confusion?
Not a good idea in my book, by a very long shot. But a nice way to sabotage
color management, though, by sowing utter chaos into the field -- which
would finally prove color management to be as hopeless as some tirelessly
*say* it is. Which will make some people very happy (we both know whom I
mean in particular... <g>).
> Device link profiles are the "new" version of the proprietary classic "color
> management" tools (before ICC).
Would you mind explaining that statement? It's very opaque to me.
> I'm afraid that it will take another 10 years to "educate" the "market"...
So...we should *prolong* the transition by *going along* with the "market's
lack of education"?
Whatever the meaning of "market" is in this context, of course. Aren't *we*
the "market" too, by the way?
> So, let's be realistic and promote the addition and not the trashing of
> useful tools. Let the professionals chose their tools themselves. Amen. :-)
"Useful tool": I know another person that thinks just like you. But not many
more that agree with him and his assessment of Custom CMYK's "usefulness".
Speaking for myself, you have not changed my mind regarding what I posted to
this forum last Friday regarding the Custom CMYK engine, when I asked for
compelling reasons to keep that tool in Photoshop at this point in time.
I don't mean to speak for others, but it's my sense that there are other
forums which are more receptive to your plea. <g> Maybe those are better
venues for your position. Unless your argument comes with more "meat" on it.
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