Re: Screensharing with colormanagement
Re: Screensharing with colormanagement
- Subject: Re: Screensharing with colormanagement
- From: Mark Stegman <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 23:53:03 +0000
Ben,
Your comments are littered with the sort of practical common sense that is
unusual on a forum of technical experts where I, for one, are often left
floundering by the technical debates. I live in a world of Prepress
Operators and Photographers who have to make things work in order for their
employers and clients to stay in business. It has always been the case that
publications and photographic prints are viewed, or consumed, in a variety
of viewing conditions: in factories and offices, on trains and planes, in
living rooms and bedrooms, as well as imaging 'laboratories', all using a
variety of lighting sources that are never controlled and often mixed.
However, this misses the point of controlled viewing conditions and
standardisation in particular. It is not so much about the end user as it
is about the production environment and 'the contract'. The long drawn out
process of standards development has, as its first priority, a justifiable
business case. In this commercial frame of reference parties come together
to produce printed product for a commercial gain and need to have agreed,
standardised, viewing conditions so that can agree on the qualities of the
product and limitations/boundaries of the contract. It is as essential as
lawyers having enough light to read the fine print. It's not just about the
appeal of the image. What happens to it once sold is anybody' guess. It may
be confronting to those that put so much time, energy, effort and expertise
into perfecting these things that, to us, are fine examples of the
technical prowess of those involved in their production and a thing of
beauty to those that initially 'consume' them. But it should always be
remembered that in this age of recycling they could end up in the lavatory
rather than the laboratory... and not just for the purposes for which they
were intended.
Mark
On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 at 06:30 Ben Goren <email@hidden> wrote:
> On Jun 9, 2016, at 7:09 PM, Mark Stegman <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> > Ben implies the viewing environment has to be the most difficult to
> predict and control and I would agree. The technical limtations of
> 'affordable' lighting may be a factor but convincing the affected parties
> that it is a worhtwhile investment along with other contributors to the
> ambient viewing conditions is probably the biggest obstacle.
>
> There is, of course, another perspective, one that I try to
> encourage...and that is to recognize the futility inherent in the quest.
>
> That's not to suggest giving up, of course, or that standards should be
> excessively loosened or what-not.
>
> It _is,_ however, my suggestion that you should always start by
> considering what the end product actually is and how it will be viewed.
> Magazines, for example, are mostly viewed in living rooms and doctor's
> offices. If a magazine photo looks great in an editorial photo booth but
> looks horrid in typical office lighting, that's a problem -- and I've seen
> some big-name magazines whose pictures were far too dark for the living
> room and which only came to life in direct sunlight.
>
> Straight-up reprographic work is difficult but straightforward; it's very
> reasonable to expect to be able to put the original and copy side-by-side
> and have them look the same, with a couple minor footnotes.
>
> And if you have source and destination viewing environments, things are
> also straightforward. For example, you might get a spectrographic
> measurement of the ambient light in an artist's studio and a museum gallery
> and make a copy that very faithfully reproduces the "look" that the artist
> saw, even if the museum's lighting is quite different.
>
> But if you want to make a general-purpose print that looks good anywhere
> and everywhere...well, the _original_ isn't going to look good anywhere and
> everywhere, so why should you expect the copy to be any better?
>
> 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