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 12:05:51 -0700
On Jan 9, 2008, at 1:24 AM, Marco Ugolini wrote:
That I don't agree with. It may be easier for the user to adopt
that route (in a sort of ostrich-like manner) if he/she is not
conversant with color management workflows. But that comes at the
risk of changing the appearance of elements in the file and
obtaining unpredictable results.
InDesign is rudimentary in its handling of CMYK, as are many
applications. Repurposing CMYK in a page layout application is
fraught with peril. If the method of separation is not known at page
layout time, build the thing in RGB and export PDF/X-3 or PDF/X-4.
Building it in CMYK, tagged or untagged, is not an efficient way of
going about it, and any expectations that it can be repurposed are
pie in the sky. That is a much more advanced workflow than most
printing companies can deal with in an automated way. It can be done,
yes. But it's an advanced workflow and cannot be done in InDesign
right now.
As for what someone else said yesterday on this forum (I forget
who) regarding the fact that presumably the "preserve CMYK numbers"
policy applies only to native InDesign objects and not to linked
image files, I would ask other people more in the know than I am
about InDesign to please confirm that.
False. It applies to both native content and imported content. It
acts like the Off policy for imported content, and acts like the
preserve embedded policy for native elements and the indesign
document itself.
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