RE: rendering intents
RE: rendering intents
- Subject: RE: rendering intents
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:16:07 -0400
Ben,
You can't say it is "unsuited" for critical work. Most folks, pros and
non-pros, have no ideas of the kinds of things discussed on this list. I
won't start naming companies or "brands" (that's the buzzword, "brands", if
you want to throw your weight around in some circles) but the list of folks
who use Photoshop with their eyes blindfolded for a living, everyday, is
long. I agree image-based gamut mappings are an interesting if not superior
alternative to what Photoshop's base transforms currently bakes. But I'll
tell you, there is SO much going on between ANY carefully crafted color
conversions and the final product, in the "print" business that, a few
deltas here and there won't make any kind of direct impact on the result.
And the list of things that DO impinge on the results between Photoshop and
the final product is very, very long, and scary.
Yet, if I ran a giglee shop, I might have long developed my own conversion
routines using Argyll or something else. I know folks who are in complete
control of their workflow with a clockwork repeatability. In those
scenarios, I think it is very much worth going the distance.
And your arguments are well taken :-)
Best / Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Goren [mailto:email@hidden]
Sent: 8 septembre 2014 14:35
To: Roger Breton
Cc: 'Steve Upton'; 'ColorSync'
Subject: Re: rendering intents
On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:10 AM, Roger Breton <email@hidden> wrote:
> The way Photoshop implements conversions since CS5.5 is fine for 99.99% of
the cases.
Might I suggest?
This is, indeed, the case. And probably 80% of those reading these words
fall into the remaining 0.01%.
Those of us in the 0.01% are much better off not using Photoshop for color
management, and instead using something like Argyll that doesn't suffer from
all these problems -- and that, "oh-by-the-way," does a far superior job at
the mundane stuff to boot.
The workflow is easy. Before ever opening the original source in Photoshop,
use Argyll or whatever to convert it to your preferred working space. Do
everything you want to do in Photoshop in that space. When you're done
fiddling with it, do whatever conversions you need to with Argyll. For
example, convert from your working space to your printer's space; when you
open the file in Photoshop, keep the printer's space as the tagged profile,
and there's your soft proof. When you print, pick your printer's space as
both source and destination and there's your managed print.
Photoshop's color management is fast and convenient and easy and all that
you need for non-critical work. It's unsuited for critical work -- but
that's okay; just don't use it for critical work and instead use something
that _is_ suitable for critical work. Problem solved!
Cheers,
b&
_______________________________________________
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