10:45 p.m.
"Anybody who is not happy with the settings for the Default ISO-Profiles
should and could create his or her own.
The reason for the 100% K was already explained by Florian Süßl."
I know that one can make his/her own profiles and I have been following the discussions
:0).
I was not criticizing the ECI ISO profile, only trying to get some explanation on why 100%
K was chosen instead of fx 95%.I have read some answers on my question but I still
don't know why 100%K was chosen.
Best regards.
Jon A Sandholt.
8:33 p.m.
Hi Jon
As Florian already said: If you have an RGB image from a scanner or a
camera, there are most likely no 0/0/0 Areas - only some sharpened
pixels. And therefor the 100% K will most likely not happen.
So if you want your black areas in an rgb image to become an heavy
black cmyk area with 330 % ink coverage (with 95% black), then you can
get it with such a profile. But you would not get 95% black if this was
already set the max-K value in the profile.
Again: this is not true if your black in an rgb-image has an rgb-value
of 0/0/0
happy weekend
Peter Kleinheider
On 02.04.2004, at 22:45, Jón A Sandholt wrote:
"Anybody who is not happy with the settings for
the Default
ISO-Profiles
should and could create his or her own.
The reason for the 100% K was already explained by Florian Süßl."
I know that one can make his/her own profiles and I have been
following the discussions :0).
I was not criticizing the ECI ISO profile, only trying to get some
explanation on why 100% K was chosen instead of fx 95%.I have read
some answers on my question but I still don't know why 100%K was
chosen.
Best regards.
Jon A Sandholt.
7337
days inactive
7338
days old
eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Jón A Sandholt -
Peter Kleinheider