On Friday, Aug 8, 2003, at 12:48 Europe/Copenhagen, Olaf Drümmer wrote:
From my point of view (similar to what Andre
Schuetzenhofer stated)
there
is never a 'wrong ICC profile' attached to an image (or some other
object, or a whole page). Instead, the only question is whether one
likes
what an image looks like. The end result counts, not how you get there.
Hmm ...
The consumer of a printed publication never gets to see the original.
The consumer gets to see multiple reproductions of the original. And
probably does not notice discrepancies unless the image is run in
multiple national newspapers, for instance.
Because images are edited with the photographer's monitor as reference,
the press operator has no everyday concept of what the color should
look like. This is defined by the tagged RGB working space and not by
what the press operator thinks, as Martina Stahl up at Prinfo once said.
Which all boils down to the observation that people who make their
money on images, and the people who buy these images, are the ones
driving color management. Which again boils down to the observation
that photographers took the lead from the very beginning.
Because its their . . . . on the line -:).
It does not matter whether I understand a
single bit of color management of know what an ICC profile is.
Right, scratching music is not the same as playing the original musical
score, assigning profiles is not the same as preserving intended color
appearance. But where is this taking us . . .
(2) Let's have a statistic excursion...:
(a) looking at the population of all print content creators (from hobby
artists to secretaries to freelance graphic designers to magazine
layouters to very highly skilled prepress specialist) I'd say that
(a.I) very few (definitely below 5 %, my personal estimate though would
say below 1 %) understand prepress in general and color management
specifically, and master both.
Yes, but the people using these products do care or they wouldn't buy
into the concept of preserving color appearance. True, they are a very,
very small group in the huge color market. But they pay for the
software and hardware development that makes the whole discussion
relevant in the first place.
(d) I dare to say that for many reasons we will never
manage to educate
the majority of 95 % or 99 % of people who are print content creators.
That's what defaults are for. They are what the manufacturer believes
the user should confidently rely upon. Defaults need much stronger and
more structured backing, but that has been said very loudly and very
publically before.
Is there an insurance against making the wrong
decision? No (at least
none that I know of ;->). If it is an expensive print run, have the
customer sign off professionally created proofs. If it is a relatively
inexpensive print run, learn to live with the risk (will be less
expensive in the long run than being too wary).
Right, shorter runs implies lower risks implies less fretting and
fussing. Point also hit on by Laurel Brunner. You are both right, of
course.
life will be much easier if content
stays in whatever RGB as long as possible, and if already associated
with
ICC profiles - the better.
Absolutely.
If an image/a page looks good, there is no
problem to be solved - nobody should care which profile if any was used
to get there.
No. No again. And no once more, just to be on the safe side.
The ICC framework is based on the concept of the device profile. The
user self-configures, self-calibrates, self-characterizes and
self-profiles the devices in her studio, plugs into the connection
space, and simulates the devices (: printing processes, film recorders,
whatever) she does not have in her studio.
Try the playing-it-by-chancing-it pitch in the PhotogamutRGB.icc
thread. Personally, I wouldn't have the temerity -:).
Last but not least, forcing people who do not have a
clue
about prepress or color management to convert their print content to
CMYK
is simply not a very smart approach.
Absolutely.
But then again Kodak, Apple, PhotoDisk, Heidelberg . . . everybody and
her neighbour specified color in deviceCMYK for all marketing until
recently, and some probably still do for all I know. It's about putting
one's mouth where one's money is to some extent -:).
Thanks,
Henrik