Digital BW, The Print

Tyler,

I think the point here is that you can have one master file that you print
from...no edits for output...and then print that file with many different
options (toners, printers, inksets, papers, etc.) and not have to edit the
file to move between the options.  Given the lack of consistency that I see
in printers, inksets and papers this strikes me as a really important
function of an output system.  If I make a print today...I want to have the
ability to make an identical print in two years when I've switched printers
and have new inks...and maybe even a different paper.  If my system is
properly calibrated I can do that.  If I don't have control over this...I'm
at someone else's mercy.  Admittedly, the RGB partitioned workflow gave some
ability to do this...the controls were just much more limited...and didn't
integrate well to a measured approach based on densitometry.

Robert

On 6/6/03 11:53 AM, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:

> I feel like the godfather character- I keep trying to get out and they
> keep dragging me back in! I really don't mean to be argumentative, and
> I think OPM/IJC has many great attributes. However I have to take
> issue with a lot of this, but you know, with a lot of love.
> As Antonis says, editing a master file for the anomalies of a given
> output system is unwise at a glance. Certainly saving a master file
> with those edits is not a good idea. But in fact, correcting for
> output at any given time is SOP in this day and age. We convert our
> master color file to the output profile either manually or on the fly
> all the time, that's the idea. We certainly don't save the converted
> file, that is destructive and it's usefulness for the future is very
> limited. We may even have a little editing to do to optimize our print
> through that profile and printer. Again, saving the master with those
> particular edits would be unwise.
> For mono printing systems, we may have a master 16 bit gamma 2.2 (for
> example) file. Our output system, whether Piezo, RGB driver after
> curves, ImagePrint, IJC, whatever, is never perfectly linear or
> possibly not appropriate for that given print. So we may have a final
> curve we want to apply to print they way we want today on whatever
> output system we have today. Why would anyone save their file in that
> state? It's device specific. Also, if our work habits are refined, a
> final curve to a high bit file is not very destructive at all. It's
> not an issue.
> I'll be willing to bet that, with OPM/IJC and the new Ergosoft option,
> after initial sep curves are developed or canned ones selected, final
> densitometer linearization is an overall correction applied at INPUT
> to the file on the fly. That's exactly the same thing as applying a
> final correction curve, exactly. Any other method of linearization
> would be ridiculously complex and have to alter each and every ink
> channel.
> So, that a file needs some kind of optimization for printing is not a
> plus or minus of any particular product or output system, but more of
> a convenience feature of whether or not it happens on the fly or you
> do it yourself in Photoshop.
> 
> Black box printing systems-
> Piezo plugin and Pro
> ImagePrint
> Epson driver with RGB cures user can't edit (for experience reasons)
> Maybe some others, I'm not paying much attention at this point
> 
> With these, if you have no flat spots, reversals, harsh transitions or
> other major problems, with well made master files a final tweak is not
> a problem. I'd say, for those not interested in delving the depths of
> individual channel control with the new systems, it's no different
> than what an overall linearization is going to do on the fly with
> these new systems. If the correction can be handled by the particular
> percentage points Photoshop offers in a custom grayscale space, you
> can even save it out and apply it when printing on the fly, assuming
> your output system accepts grayscale in.
> 
> Obviously, new systems have extraordinary features for those who
> choose to work with them and I'm certainly stoked about the
> possibilities. But an output system is not dictating an unwise or
> destructive workflow, it may however make for a much more convenient
> one. Let me know if I'm missing something, please.
> This is worth restating-
>> Of course, as
>> profiles become available for OPM, not only are they canned and
> easy-to-use,
>> the whole thing is free, which is another matter to consider!
> 
> Tyler
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>