• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag
 

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: "Non-linear"?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "Non-linear"?


  • Subject: Re: "Non-linear"?
  • From: Mo <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 10:13:27 -0700



Please specify "repurpose".

As far as I know, "repurposing" means tailoring an image file to a given end
use. By definition, the myriad variations of that task do *not* demand that
we use exclusively *one* particular source color space.

A lot of times in the cycle of art creation in the commercial sector - it's nothing more then a compilation of scattered changes by many people pulling a project in different directions during the actual production cycle. It's not uncommon for some firms to continue to make adjustments to images after the fact of final approval during a large campaign. Also, it's not uncommon that a client says, oh by the way, we need images for the web as well as large format output for bus shelters as an example. This is AFTER the fact that the image or ads are already prepped for a specific media destination.


So what you are telling me is that taking the existing compressed color space for one output is acceptable for another? Well, I guess I can't argue with you if you are willing to accept less then optimal files and have a low expectation of the outcome. You also must understand that most people couldn't care less about file management, process control or color management, but they know what they like and don't like when they see it. Because of where the industry is going and everyone is now a professional with software in hand, lots of mistakes happen and expecting all users to have a common understanding of what is required for their success is asking far too much. Assuming they will either learn or learn the hard way is really a selfish / self centered approach to having better art. People need a road map to success and the current implementation of color management has had little success in trying to accomplish better art and educating users. Also, assuming that people will take ownership of files when the stakes are high is often faced with finger pointing and the software does no help to accomplish unsolving the mystery of where an error occurred.


The big problem in a production environment is knowing where the files
came from and where are they going to.

Identifying the most appropriate source profile for the image is a step
separate from "repurposing": before we repurpose an image, we must find out
what it's supposed to look like -- meaning, which color profile most
appropriately describes the appearance of its color numbers.

I completely disagree. Repurposing files is what Adobe sells as their crown jewel of an RGB workflow, but it has fell flat on its face to be honest and I have the dents in my helmut to prove it. To repurpose files you SHOULD have a larger bit as well as a larger gamut file to start with so you CAN have the option if you want to clip, compress or re assign an image to some other output. Besides that, a lot of the work I do - I have no friggen clue as to what the client wants, has given me, or what they want back. It's a discovery process for both service provider and art director and if I start with crap, it can only get worse from there. There is no current assurance if the profile represents the numbers or the appearance from when it was last captured or converted.




"Better" at what, Mike? It seems to me that Karsten's reply is the right one
(to quote: "Either the color space the image is in when you receive the
file, or the destination color space that fits your customer's requests.")

SEEMS? Again, the acceptance of old school thinking is just apauling to me here on this forum. Let's just all guess at what the hell to do with an image. That's progress intelligently planned for sure.




What feature(s) in the working space are you looking for, exactly? In your
message it's clear what you *do not* want, and wish to avoid, but what is it
that you *do* want from your color space?


I need color assurance of a color space so I can do my job better. People need better tools to create better art. It's not color science guys, it's common sense that is lacking in users as well as the current technology of the implementation of color manglement.

mo


_______________________________________________ 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
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: "Non-linear"?
      • From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
    • Re: "Non-linear"?
      • From: Karsten Krüger <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: "Non-linear"? (From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: largest pro monitor
  • Next by Date: Re: On the use of wide-gamut RGB working spaces
  • Previous by thread: Re: "Non-linear"?
  • Next by thread: Re: "Non-linear"?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread