Re: Images for print
Re: Images for print
- Subject: Re: Images for print
- From: Karsten Krüger <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:11:07 +0200
Am 10.10.2008 um 11:07 schrieb eric@poem:
It seems to me that there is no excuse in this day and age for
photographers, who after all are at the very start of our digital
food-chain, to be paid to produce an image for print that cannot be
satisfactorily and successfully reproduced, all the tools are there
for them to ensure it can.
All the talk of wide gamut containers, pushing and tweaking images
et al, concerns me as someone who has to deal with the commercial
aspect of managing expectations. I my view, commissioned photography
is a commercial product, a means to an end. If the image looks great
in RGB on a wide gamut display but looks crap in print, what's the
point?
And I do believe from my experience, publishers are getting wise to
the fact that repurposing, retouching or tailoring these problem
images costs them money, either directly at their reprohouse or in
time internally, depending on their workflow. The more cost
conscious will go where the product costs them less in the end.
I totally agree with you.
On the other hand some photographers do not like to be reduced to the
commercial aspects of this business. Art and creativity are first and
the choice of the color space is often understood as part of art, and
not part of business.
An other motivation is fear and uncertainty in technical aspects of
color management.
Karsten
_______________________________________________
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