Digital BW, The Print

Paul


> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>

> 
> A visual linearization procedure should be easy to implement in QTR and IJC.
> I hope those with the programming talent take a shot at it.

It's not needed.  Roy has, in effect, done it for us with his ICC profiles.
As long as the monitor is well profiled, he has done the profiling of the
print space and we can use colour management to do the rest.  You might say
"well you still have to have a well profiled monitor".  Yes and no.  If
"yes" then nothing more is that necessary.  If "no" then one can always do
the "correction step" either as I have described or as you have described -
and this must be done by the guy with the "bad" monitor and nobody else.
The problem with needing a correction step is that (1) it is different for
everyone and (2) it needs to be updated over time - in the same way that
monitor profiling is needed on a regular basis.  Also, a well profiled
monitor is a must for any colour work which is heavily reliant on a colour
management if done in any serious degree.

Hopefully monitor/printer profiling equipment will continue to fall in
price.  It is already very sensibly priced when compared to the other
elements of digital photography from camera to scanner to computer to
printer.  Perhaps it is just not as visible as an item of expenditure to
someone starting out.  At $220 or so for an Eye One Display there really
isn't any excuse for someone serious about digital photography -
particularly if they intend to make a business out of it - from having a
well-profiled monitor.  It's still $220 and that isn't chump change for many
but it must be an item on any serious digital photographer's "need" list.

> I'd like
> nothing more than to eliminate the need for Photoshop -- which is overpriced

That's a big call.  Personally I am staggered, and very grateful, that it is
so cheap.  Step back for a second and think of all that can be achieved with
this package which costs just $600.  An individual has before them quite a
number of very serious creative businesses with just a modest investment of
capital - that opportunity didn't exist 20 years ago.

I think it's too easy to take for granted where we've come from and what can
be achieved by the powerful and readily available software out there today.

> and overkill for the B&W photographer.


I agree that many of its functions are not needed for the B&W photographer
and it would be nice to see a trimmed down version or trimmed down
competitor for the B&W community.  But as we know, the B&W community is a
very minor portion of the overall community targeted by companies such as
Adobe - and I doubt it could pay its own way (ie cover the cost of producing
a B&W only product).  In that case, you might find that a trimmed down
version would have to be priced above the full product which of course
simply makes it uneconomic to buy and hence produce.


Cheers

Steve