Re: CMYK spaces used for document creation
Re: CMYK spaces used for document creation
- Subject: Re: CMYK spaces used for document creation
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:12:56 -0500
On Nov 2, 2009, at 5:33 PM, Martin Orpen wrote:
On 2 Nov 2009, at 21:02, Chris Murphy wrote:
At this point the assertion that ACE conversions are so vastly
inferior, visually so, to the effect they're noticeably and
obviously banding and ugly, is total conjecture without a
presentation of data and a sequence for reproducing the behavior.
Merely saying things does not make them true.
Likewise pretending that that was my assertion...
I think you'll find that my assertion was that I could get a better
RGB to CMYK and RGB to RGB conversion outside of Photoshop using
device links and that the banding in the test chart couldn't be
entirely attributed to problems with the profile/printer.
On Nov 2, 2009, at 9:10 AM, Martin Orpen wrote:
The results are significantly different.
The PS conversion is bandy and ugly looking.
Personally, I'd rather stick needles in my eyes than let Photoshop
handle something as important as a colour conversion.
WTF? You have asserted that ACE conversions are vastly inferior.
Photoshop uses ACE for conversions. So what exactly are you saying
that you haven't asserted?
Reproducing the behaviour is as easy as downloading the test chart,
building a device link in Argyll and then doing a conversion.
I'm talking about reproducing the PS conversion that is banding and
ugly. I haven't experienced this. You're stating you have experienced
it. Exactly what are the conditions to reproduce this?
Reframing this issue as my having to prove some kind of bug in
Photoshop is something that only you and Andrew seem determined to do.
Nope. I'm saying you either have a set of exact conditions for
reproducing the behavior (banding and ugly conversions) or you don't.
Very easy.
We don't even know what output device you're talking about, or what
driver you're using. It sounds an awful lot like conjecture and scant
on details. And thus not very interesting.
I'm very pleased with the results and would recommend that others
(who are comfortable working without a GUI) give it a try.
I have. I'm not seeing what you're seeing. So you can either provide a
sequence for others to attempt to reproduce your exact steps, or you
can't. But asserting things, and then not providing very basic
information for others to try and reproduce your results is generally
referred to as B.S. although it can go by other names also.
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