Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> 
> When you scan something it records a file value which in turn 
depends on the
> scanner colour profile. 128/128/128 from a scanner has little 
meaning unless
> you know its colour space.  So using a scanner assumes you have a 
good
> profile for that scanner.  Circular.

Sorry. Presumably the individual taking the photograph to begin with 
is well aware of what to expect of a neutral gray ie: it's neutral. 
If it comes out of the camera or off the scanner as something 
different that too doesn't require an Einstein to recognise it needs 
alteration. Neutrals have been the basis for color correction for 
far longer than digital has been around. It isn't brain surgery.
As you accept that a representation given by say, GG2.2, in reality 
alters tonal relationships versus GG1.8, you ought to realise that 
the color spaces are, in fact, what I said "artificial constructs" 
that may be usefull. Then again under a different circustance they 
might not. You seem to be saying that the RGB numbers recorded (in 
whatever fashion) are not relevant. That is nonsense. Those numbers 
are what you have to work with. They are, of course, folded,spindled 
and mutilated along the way by film,sensor,scanner,monitor,printer 
and not least, yourself.

> >You can 
> > also simply use photoshop curves to linearise black&white output.
> 
> How do you tell if the result is linear?  Eyeballing is not 
particularly
> accurate.  You can use a scanner but as noted above you are 
dependent on the
> assumption your scanner profile is good.  But is it?

Eyeballing,in the end, is the 'only' measure of success. I'm 
astounded that you would be unaware of that. The sole and only 
purpose of a print in the context of this forum is to be looked at 
by (goodness) that totally inaccurate and unworthy human eye. 
> 
> > 
> > In terms of numbers, I believe they are indeed relevant. If you 
send
> > a 128,128,128 dot to the printer, it will be printed the same 
every
> > time.( or else you need to change printers )
> 
>  Does it match what you see on screen?  Again you
> can eyeball or desire, as you seem to do, something better.

What you don't seem to understand and what I have said before is 
that whether or not it matches is largely irrelevant so long as it 
is reasonably close. Reasonably close can be accomplished without 
every bell and whistle known to man. The threads initiation was a 
question of whether or not one could manage without expensive 
instrumentation. The truth is: yes, one can. The desireability of 
doing that may be questioned (and is an individual preference) but 
Not the possibility.
As for my personal desires, I don't believe I made mention of any.

> >It is the consistancy
> > that truly matters. You can compensate balance and/or tones so 
long
> > as a given #set prints the same each time. This is particularly 
true
> > if you are not trying to match up to someone else's gear but 
merely
> > printing your own stuff.
> 
> >Color spaces and color management merely
> > distort the 0-255 or % no's onscreen in different ways for 
different
> > purposes and are themselves an artificial construct. Yes they are
> > usefull albeit with much mumbo jumbo attached.
> 
> Sorry but this is garbage.  They don't distort anything - they 
give a pixel
> value meaning and help you manage pixel values from one device to 
another in
> a way that keeps the colour (greyscale or not) consistent.  There 
isn't any
> mumbo jumbo to that but it does involve understanding a little.  A 
simple
> book Real World Color Management by Bruce Fraser will tell you all 
you need.

You need to look again yourself. Distortion is exactly what is done. 
Color space changes alter the preceding pixel values or at least 
some of them. That is pretty much what distortion means. It is 
literal truth, hardly garbage. The necessity of doing this in order 
to get imperfect devices to input or output colors somewhere close 
to those expected, does not change that fact. In both black and 
white and color the ability to make those alterations by hand as it 
were is there. Otherwise there would be little use for Pshop. As for 
mumbo jumbo, the comment reflected what I have seen online of 
halftruths and misunderstandings regarding what you term as simple. 
You are correct in that assessment. It is simple though it is seldom 
treated as such.

I have no quarrel with your concept of things in the consumer sense 
of Plug and Play. If possible no knowledge needed at all is 
preferable there.

Regards
Duane