Bob Croxford wrote:-
>Judging by the number of people who post queries about problems to this list
>I would think there is another shedload of smudgers who need a second
>opinion.
Hi Bob,
I don't doubt this at all.
>
>I know of a major name in the industry whose need for a properly evaluated
>set of proofs was holding up a big investment. What they needed was a proof
>which had as much clarity as their own proofing setup and a match to machine
>proofs done as a test. They just didn't have time to proof 2,000 plus images
>on their own small proof printer.
A valid point,but the questions I asked Philip about the proposed
workflow still remain.
At the end of the day if you're offering proofing it has not only to be
accurate , but also valid for its intended destination.
Also , is the agency in question providing contract proofs or just guide
prints ? As we all know their is a vast difference between the two.
>
>As more of the analogue proofers fall by the wayside a real gap is opening
>for digital proofers.
Yep.
Neil Barstow has pointed out that he and Thomas have been working with us
for the past two years on a Standard for the exchange of digital files.
This work is an extension of an initiative started by us members of the
DIG committee some four years ago , which resulted over in our first
'Code of Practice' for digital image file supply (published over two
years ago and available on the AOP website ).
The Pro-File scheme has been held up for an inordinately long time
because of issues regarding CMYK seperations and validation / proof
prints.
For the past two years I've been working on these matters with, amongst
others, the Advertising Pre Press Association, DuPont ,the Periodical
Publishers Association and the Digital Ad Lab , and we are at last
reaching a turning point.
Having recently joined yet another technical committee,I can say that an
end is in sight at least in the area of supplying images to publications
both editorially and as advertising.
Needless to say , I'll keep this list informed as to the progress of our
meetings.
In the meantime , I can say that the adoption of 'robust colour
management protocols' combined with the implementation of ICC profiling
forms the basis of the future workflow.
Exactly as was suggested some (many ? ) years ago .
I did a presentation on the above at the recent PPA conference and asked
the questions:-
a) Who uses ICC profiling within a colour managed workflow at present ?
b) Who intends to use the process in the very near future ?
c) Who is opposed to the entire concept ?
Answers a: 33% b : 60% c : 7%
Given these percentages I think that it's only fair that we ask Philip if
his agency is
employing the methods that the majority ogf the industry requires. If
they are ...fantastic!
If they are not , then I'm sure that their will be a whole queue of
people lining up to help them with their task ( including me ! ).
If they are producing contract proofs , they may be a viable alternative
to the the many pre press bureaus that already offer this service ,
especially if they are more cost effective .
So let's give Philip a chance to get back to us before we make any
judgement.
Regards,
Bob Marchant ( present Chair of the Digital Imaging Group )
------------------------- Colour Therapy Ltd
-------------------------
------------- Digital Imaging / Consultancy / Training
-------------
----------------------- 44 (0)207 381 3337
-----------------------
===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
