Re: UCR/GCR revisited
Re: UCR/GCR revisited
- Subject: Re: UCR/GCR revisited
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:16:27 -0400
Hi Marco,
I think Karl has a point, nevertheless. I've seen the kinds of ink keys
dependencies problem he describes and and I can vouch that it could be a
real problem. I would not want to be in the shoes of the pressman having to
fight it out on the press as his hands will be pretty much tied.
Best / Roger
>
> But, on the other hand, using different black generation policies for images
> on a single signature may have the *positive* effect of preserving the
> integrity of images in that signature that we want to *protect* against
> possible color shifts on press, while allowing other less critical ones to
> shift as they may.
>
> For example, if you have some images on an individual signature that are in
> full color and others that also use all 4 inks but are meant to look
> neutral, you may want to separate the latter using a stronger black
> generation (not "Max K" necessarily) to provide added protection against
> loss of neutrality, whereas the former can still be separated with a lower
> black component.
>
> 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