Re: "Safe CMYK" workflows [was: Misleading Adobe Common Color Architecture]
Re: "Safe CMYK" workflows [was: Misleading Adobe Common Color Architecture]
- Subject: Re: "Safe CMYK" workflows [was: Misleading Adobe Common Color Architecture]
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 12:05:38 -0700
On Jan 8, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Marco Ugolini wrote:
Excuse me, but...what is "safe" about that "safe CMYK" workflow? If
the linked image has an embedded profile that describes its color
appearance accurately, and that embedded profile is different from
the active profile (default or assigned) in InDesign for that color
mode (CMYK or RGB), then, by stripping the embedded profile, in
effect you are altering the correct appearance of the linked image
by assigning to it a different profile than the one it was intended
to work with, right?
The profile is not stripped. It is ignored.
It's possible to handle CMYK content in a manner that is worse than
ignoring intended color appearance, and that is what the default
"Preserve Numbers (Ignore Linked Profiles)" policy is designed to
achieve. It's a clear recognition that the handling and repurposing
of CMYK has not reached a sufficient level of advancement, so it's
better to just let the numbers come out as they are, and if there are
problems hopefully it will be caught in a proofing stage.
Anyone who really cares about color will either soft proof or hard
proof the document, and either one of those will show any possible
discrepancy in color of the image right off the bat.
Chris Murphy
_______________________________________________
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