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? 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. See the latest Guide to print production 13.0 here http://www.idealliance.org/products/guide-print-production-13. It's money well invested. / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Rodney Sent: 25 février 2015 09:10 To: John Castronovo; ColorSync Subject: Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
On Feb 25, 2015, at 5:43 AM, John Castronovo <jc@technicalphoto.com> wrote:
In my experience and from what I've been told by those who know far more about it than I do, GRACoL conversions aren't so different from SWOP that they will produce less than ideal results in a shop that still uses SWOP, in fact the results will usually be better. So why continue to use SWOP at all?
SWOP is a type of press, not a specific press behavior. SWOPV2 as I stated IS a specification for a type of press OUTPUT and behavior based on TR001. One can be running a SWOP press that exhibits TR001 qualities and the guy next store could have a SWOP press that isn't anything like it. Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/