Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
- Subject: Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:11:38 -0700
> On Feb 25, 2015, at 12:49 PM, Roger Breton <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Well, if they are running a "SWOP" press these days, under the G7 method, with SWOP2013-compliant inks colorimetry, the SWOPV2 "specification" isn't worth much anymore, Andrew?
Of course not. Just as targering SWOPV2 and sending to an Web press! Or an Epson ink jet.
Just because we have G7 doesn't mean everyone conforms to it. I seriously doubt that SWOPV2 behavior has gone the way of the dodo bird. If you need to target that specific press condition, my experience is SWOPV2 works very well. If the output doesn't confirm, the print will not either. Nothing new here.
Are folks suggesting Adobe should removed SWOPV2? That would be a bad idea. Are people suggesting Adobe supply some G7 profile (they built?) and it's now the default? Doable, don't hold your breath. And if the G7 profile was setup as the default and a clueless user converted to that color space and sent the files to someone who really is confirming to TR001 (for whatever reason), the output will suffer.
> I think I'd rather go along with Terry Wyse's suggestion of adopting SWOP2006_C3 (now CGATS21-CRPC5) as the new default for North America in Photoshop than stay for ever with SWOPv2.
Adopt any output color space you want. Just make sure the images go to that output device. Nothing stops us from doing this so I'm not sure what the debate is other than Photoshop's default. For RGB it's sRGB and for me, that's totally wrong, so I altered it.
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
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