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: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:29:04 -0500
Hi Marco,
> True, but let's not forget to add that a large number of those
> disappointments originates from a *misunderstanding* of color management,
> and from using it in a (pardon my non-Canadian "French") "half-assed"
> manner. Like: converting instead of assigning a profile; stripping away
> instead of honoring embedded profiles; assigning the incorrect profile;
> converting to the incorrect profile; not soft-proofing correctly because the
> monitor itself is not profiled, or even much too old and unreliable;
> conflicts between tagged images and some RIPs; building output profiles of
> poor quality or with settings inappropriate to the end use; etc.
So true, so true. Assigning, converting, honoring, profile, monitor,
settings galore, I'll be the first to admit that a large number of users
still haven't got a clue as to what's going on. And when you write below
that in prepress, after 10 years of this CMS treatment, so many people are
still in the dark. What breaks my heart is to think that everyone washes
their hands of color, once it lands in the door of most prepress houses. The
data comes in as CMYK and no one wants to touch it even wih a 10 foot pole.
It's still such a black art and voodoo and taboo subject. What surprises me
is how customers put up day in day out with crappy colors. I guess they
don't know better.
> For example, if one assigns the US Web Coated (SWOP) v2 and
> SWOP2006_Coated5v2 profiles each to one of two copies of the "TC3.5 CMYK"
> reference file (which contains 432 patches), and then calculates the color
> difference between the two sets in DeltaE 2000, using the Relative
> Colorimetric intent in a worksheet in ColorThink Pro, the report says that
> there are only 26 patches (6% of the total) with a value higher than 1.5
> (the highest value being 1.89); 196 patches (45% of the total) have DeltaE
> values ranging between 1.5 and 1.89, and 236 patches (55%) have values lower
> than 1.
>
> On the other hand, the same comparison done using the Absolute Colorimetric
> intent reports 187 patches (43% of the total) with a value higher than 1.5
> (the highest value being 2.61); 44 patches (10% of the total) have DeltaE
> values higher than 2, and only 2 patches (0.46%) are higher than 2.5.
>
> So, even the color differences registered using AbsCol are still lower than
> the 3 DeltaE value that is customarily used as the cutoff between acceptable
> and non-acceptable results.
Wow! That's a fantastic analysis. In this instance, I'd favor looking at the
results from the point of view of AbsCol since the media white point is
almost the same between the two datasets. So that, we're really comparing
apples with apples. You know, I'll buy the percentage differences are small.
But where are those differences in colorspace between the two datasets?
Since they both have the same 300% total ink limit and CMYK Lab. Is it in
the overprint colors (RGB)? The neutrals? I'd wish our friend the color
wizard, Steve Upton, would whip his ColorThink wand and highlight in his 3D
graph where the difference lies between the two datasets. I'll bet Steve
will say it already does and I've been sleeping all this time!
Thank's Marco.
Roger Breton
_______________________________________________
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