Re: Soft-Proofing Workflow
Re: Soft-Proofing Workflow
- Subject: Re: Soft-Proofing Workflow
- From: Ken Fleisher <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:12:20 -0400
Thank you for the suggestion, but I don't think that will solve my problem.
Perhaps my description of the workflow was a little too sparse.
We are fully color-managed and produce color-correct files with embedded ICC
profiles. When these are sent to color-managed printers, often the first
proof is accepted and the rest of the time, a second proof is usually all
that is needed. But when the printer is not color-managed, color on the
first proof can be all over the place. We need to communicate to the printer
what the image "should" look like.
If they had a color calibrated monitor, all they would need to do is open
the file in Photoshop and they could see the correct color. But clearly they
are not color managed and this is not going to happen. Remote Director is a
great idea, but won't help us if the client (i.e. the printer) does not even
have a calibrated monitor. In other words, it's not the live corrections to
the file that need to be approved by the client (printer), it's the
hard-copy printer's proof that needs to match the file, which "we" are
approving. So I don't think Remote Director is our solution.
Ken
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Matt Beals <email@hidden> wrote:
> ICS Remote Director sounds like it would fit the bill.
>
> Matt Beals
>
_______________________________________________
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