Digital BW, The Print

Sorry I meant to add that I agree with your comments below


> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 17:55:04 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ICC Soft Proofing
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> ...
>> I can only think that the reason why Epson has built black point
>> compensation directly into their profiles is because either (a) they
> don't
>> want to highlight how bad the black point can be, (2) they don't believe
>> that simulating black ink is useful, (3) they don't like the way
> Adobe PS
>> does black point compensation and prefer their own algorithm, or (4)
> some
>> mix of these.
> 
> I think it has more to do with the fact that few, if any, average
> Epson users would ever need shadow information from a file clipped
> below the ink black point, and therefore a normal colormetric
> conversion is nearly useless and would probably lead to more tech
> support calls. Believe it or not a great many decisions in this
> industry are driven by their potential consequences on tech support.
> I can think of a few reasons to need a straight colormetric conversion
> once in a great while, but I can't imagine many others needing it for
> normal printing. Under most circimstances with a tonally full file, it
> will clip.