Hello Nick,
I can not answer all the questions you asked but I´ll try to explain a few
of them:
1. Q: Why does the latest data set have a file creation
> date of 19 March 2003 if it was a file
supposedly
> measured in August 2002?
A: The original measurements from original prints had been made by various
vendors in August 2002. After averaging and smoothing the meassurements,
several modifikations was made in order to get the charakterization data as
close as possible to the ISO-specs. This explains the meassurement, resp.
the creation date. The idea behind this process was to create high-quality
charakterization data and profiles. I still think that both, the FOGRA and
ECI achieved this without any question.
2: S: > > I think we need a statement from FOGRA
A: I don´t think so. You have profiles, charakterization data and quite a
big peace of dokumentation files. Even if FOGRA made a mistake in the
beginning, what use do we all have from a official explanation? Did you had
some trouble that cost you money & nervs or is this just for a personal
satisfaction?. In that case you should write a letter to FOGRA directly and
ask them for a explanation.
3. S: > > The set I downloaded in November does have
> documentation.
>
> The files I downloaded were available for quite
> some time.
A: Shure, there was a simple explanation but not a complete documentation.
You also said that "the files you downloaded were available for quite some
time". How long? My information is that this files were deleted from the HP
almost the same day. I can´t tell this for shure because the responsible
people from FOGRA are on vaccation at the moment. After they return I´ll try
to clear this.
4. Q: > > What was the small "last minute" error?
A: According to my information there was a small separation problem -the
values for GB was not close enough to the ISO specs.
Dieter Dolezal also gave you a few very reasonable answers. There was a lot
of experts involved in the creation of the charakterization data, not only
the FOGRA or ECI. All the work was done "straight from the hart", without
any charges involved. In such case it´s quite usual to grant the one or the
other mistake that can happen. The data and profiles are absolutely free of
charge and it´s normal that no one is able to take the responsibility for
each world-wide user.
Kind regards
--
=======================================
Vladimir Gajic
Colormanagement
---------------------------------------
Albert Bauer KG
Conventstr. 1-3
22089 Hamburg
Phone: ++49 40 251 09 225
Fax: ++49 40 251 09 121
E-mail: mailto:vgajic@abc-digital.com
Homepage:
http://www.abc-digital.com
=======================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dieter Dolezal" <ddolezal(a)hirte.de>
To: <eci(a)lists.transmedia.de>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Eci] ISO Coated sb profile
> Nick,
>
> just one simple Question:
>
> As I understand the data which was on the server in the beginning of
> 2003 does correspond with the data in the profiles.
> As Fogra does publish the data without any warranty, what do we need a
> statement for?
> What advantages would a statement have?
> From my point, Vladimirs explanation does cover the events sufficiently.
> I think we should not use the list for a kind of public hearing "What
> went wrong with the data and its distribution".
> As the data is absolutely free of charge, and most people working on
> the data did this without getting paid, we should grant all
> organisations and persons involved the one or the other mistake.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dieter Dolezal
>
>
> Am Dienstag, 15.07.03, um 17:09 Uhr (Europe/Berlin) schrieb Vista:
>
> > Hello Vladimir
> >
> > I accept that FOGRA made a mistake.
> >
> > I am still puzzled.
> >
> > I think there are a lot of questions that remain
> > unanswered.
> >
> > The set I downloaded in November does have
> documentation.
>
> The files I downloaded were available for quite
> some time.
> >
> > Why does the latest data set have a file creation
> date of 19 March 2003 if it was a file
supposedly
> measured in August 2002?
> >
> > How was a data set that was supposedly available
> > on Jan 22, 2002 not created until 19 March 2003?
> >
> > What was the small "last minute" error?
> >
> > Why do both sets of Data have August 2002 in the
> > header if there was an error not noticed until
> > November-December?
> >
> > I think we need a statement from FOGRA.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Eci mailing list
> > Eci(a)lists.transmedia.de
> >
http://lists.transmedia.de/mailman/listinfo/eci
> >
> --
> Hirte Medien-Service GmbH & Co. KG
> Dieter Dolezal
> Borsteler Chaussee 85-99a
> Haus 17, Gewerbegebiet
> 22453 Hamburg
>
> Voice: +49-(0)40-51497469
> Fax: +49-(0)40-5118059
> Mobile: +49-(0)177-5595276
> route:
>
http://www.stadtplandienst.de/query;ORT=hh;LL=9.981616x53.607166;GR=2
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eci mailing list
> Eci(a)lists.transmedia.de
>
http://lists.transmedia.de/mailman/listinfo/eci