Dominic Blackmore wrote: > We have agreed to do a test where we both start with the same file and both > supply a converted file and matchprint to a given standard. > So who's to judge the results? Are the goal to get similar results (in which case it's a moot point who does the actual conversion - sort of) or is it the one with the nicest conversion. Or is the point to see if your proofer is OK.
Who says HIS proofer is OK? Unfortunately I've seen plenty of prepress houses and printers have Sherpas, Digital Cromalin, Matchprint, IRIS, Kodak Approval that were so far into the woods you wouldn't believe. And most often the vendors/printers insisted their proof were "correct" or "could be matched on print". My usual way of solving this (prooving it to them) is to send them a copy of the Pixl Test Image and have them convert this and proof it. I have a set of Lambda prints [Shameless Plug ahead] available for purchase (www.pixl.dk/Profile - Verification Kit, also available from www.neilbarstow.co.uk). These prints are a guaranteed correct representation of how the digital file should look. I then compare my Lambda prints (of which I also have good quality offset print, Cromalins etc which are very similar) with the proofer at hand. When the proofer is different from my samples it's easy to show... It offers a starting point for criticizing a "professionals" proof'er. > The problem I have is that I suspect a 'closed loop' situation and the guy > has already told me he discards the tags upon opening tiffs (just works 'by > the numbers'?!?); hence the 'not colour managed' bit of my original post, I > have asked him if his production dept. has a standard RGB working space, If > they have I fear it could be sRGB. Again sending him a known test image in Adobe RGB and see how he get's along is a good way of proceeding. If all the colours end up oversaturated or desaturated he's doing it wrong. If the point you are trying to prove is that your proofer is OK, you will never accomplish this if his setup is unknown, or his proofer is off. > > It doesn't matter if my Epson is as accurate as his Sherpa or Digital > Cromalin (contract vs. creative proofing is another story). Our Matchprints > won't match and in his mind he will have a justified reason to reject my > files! aaaarrrrrggggggg. Unless you can prove to him that it is really his setup or proofer which is in error. Yes it takes time and effort, but it's either that or give up... > > OK, I know if I can find out what his starting point is (working RGB space) You MUST! > it would be fair(er) test but we can't all be expected to second guess whats > going to happen to our files once the job has left our control. Indeed, but if this is someone you will work with on a frequent basis you will be well off to know how they work. You could easily end up in a situation where you will be blamed for poor image quality, as Prepress just does "what he usually does for scanning". This is rubbish of course (it's a digital file rather than a scan that enters his system in CMYK) but I've heard this rant, with variations, so many times: "Well the image was inferior when we received it. As you know we have years and years of knowledge in prepress and trust me, this file just wasn't good enough. I'll even make you a matchprint (which always matches the offset) to prove my point, you will have to pay for this though. No, we worked hard to save this inferior quality image and did the best possible, but the image was so far out it couldn't be salvaged entirely..." The scenario you described is exactly what is happening in thousands of prepress shops around the world. I went as far as taking 40 scanner operators through this procedure on a Scitex User Group meeting I was lecturing at. The point was to show them how to handle RGB files. All but two agreed that they just opened files in PS, warnings off, and converted to CMYK. 4 people (out of 40) knew what their RGB workspace and CMYK was set to. Most just assumed that if you leave the knobs alone they work "like in the old days". I proceeded to knock their socks off by making a much nicer adjustment with PS set correctly up, by simply using levels. Nicer by common concent than what most of them could accomplish in curves with PS's default setup (Web Graphics Default). They were slightly humiliated that I, a photographer, could outdo their curves abilities in levels, but they got the point. These people we there to learn of course so they had a (semi) open mind. Best Regards Thomas Holm / Pixl ApS - Photographer & Colour Management Expert - Adobe Certified Training Provider in Photoshop� - Imacon Authorized Scanner Training Facility - Remote Profiling Service (Output ICC profiles) - Seminars speaker and tutor on CM and Digital Imaging etc. - Home Page: www.pixl.dk � Email: th[AT]pixl.dk -- =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
