On torsdag, dec 11, 2003, at 19:11 Europe/Copenhagen, Chris Murphy
wrote:
Because of how SWOP certification works, if you want a
SWOP certified
proofing system I'd consider any product on the list
quasi-proprietary, even if it's fully ICC based.
There are two positions, as Roger Breton pointed out a while ago:
(1) A printing press is by definition too unstable to be usefully
described in an ICC CMYK printer profile, and print profiling software
and print profiling instruments cannot usefully be applied to such a
task.
(2) In the U.S. there is an organization which certifies proofing
systems according to a process for which the same organization has set
no real colorimetric tolerances.
The second position is intended to provide assurance without pressing
for instrument-based colorimetric tolerances. This position did not and
does not make sense.
Pre-certification of proofs without printing tolerances versus
self-certification of proofs with printing tolerances isn't much of an
argument . . . the latter wins out every time -:).
Thanks,
Henrik