Re: CMYK for photographers
Re: CMYK for photographers
- Subject: Re: CMYK for photographers
- From: Rick Gordon <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:51:43 -0700
I totally agree with Andrew's sentiment here, but sometimes you CAN'T get real info, either because you're using a print broker who has not assigned the job, or the printers just give misinformation or lie, and they wont accept RGB. And it may not be your choice to say go elsewhere. So what then?
Maybe try to determine if it's a web or sheetfed job, at least, and if not, go with a safe TIL. Separate to a likely standard, taking care to avoid avoidable problems, and hope for the best. Probably use a medium GCR to compromise between ink-density-related color shifts and hammered black, and hope for the best.
By all means, try and get the info, and get a sense if there's any likely adherence to it. Otherwise, play the horses. But some people play the horses better than other, and it's not all just luck.
Rick Gordon
------------------
On 3/23/12 at 5:21 PM -0600, Andrew Rodney wrote in a message entitled
"Re: CMYK for photographers":
>On Mar 23, 2012, at 4:32 PM, email@hidden wrote:
>
>> Sometimes a client will demand CMYK files without offering any description
>> of the output conditions. In this case it seemed consensus was to convert
>> to SWOPv2 which is easy as it's the Photoshop default and most
>> photographers simply use image>mode>convert to CMYK. Many photographers
>> who offer in house conversions and proofs are also using SWOPv2 for a
>> multitude of reasons.
>
>That isn't true really. The bottom line is, if a photographer (or anyone) is asked to make a CMYK conversion when the actual output conditions are unknown, don't do it.
>
>Here's an analogy. Someone asks you what F-Stop and shutter speed to set on their camera with no other information about the film or ISO setting, lighting or lack thereof etc. Someone else says "Use F8 and 125th". That would be good advise if and only if that were the correct combination of the two, based on an ISO of the capture and scene being shot. More likely, it will not be. How can anyone provide exposure information like this? They can't and should not. No different with a blind CMYK conversion.
>
>IF a press condition is conforming to SWOP V2, that would be a great conversion. If not, depending on how far from that behavior the press conditions are, the results can be really poor. Just like an image capture that is 2 stops off isn't real useful.
--
___________________________________________________
RICK GORDON
EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING
___________________________________________________
WWW: http://www.shelterpub.com
_______________________________________________
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