Digital BW, The Print

David, I understand your measurement orientation and your specific
product interest and I don't deny its current utility, given the
current state of inkjet technology. 

However, to the extent that we think about photography, and some of us
actually do, skilled eyes come into the equation and will remain
there, as products and technologies such as yours come and go.  

It seems to follow that you wouldn't/cannot dodge/burn visually,
locally adjust color by eye, make what you hope is a final print and
then tweak visually for final...the way color printing of all types
has always done. Is that right? Eyes are out? Lost arts?

It's interesting that you consider it Greek, that skilled printers can
accurately and consistently specify in numeric terms (CC) the specific
degree to which a print is red: That's been the main color analyzer
(Macbeth, Esco) sales pitch for decades. 


  

> 
> > (can't look at a print and accurately diagnose .5 Cyan for example),
> > 
> 
> Thats terminology from another era... "inkjetters" as you call them
need to 
> know when an RGB value is two points too red... "cc's of Magenta"
have little 
> meaning in the digital world. Now we live in RGB, and use L*a*b* as
a universal 
> color standard, with differences measured in Delta-Es. This red is 5 
> delta-E97 from that red, this black is 2 L* lighter than that black,
this paper white 
> measures at -6 b*, so it must be artificially whitened. Those are
the color 
> distinctions of the digital imaging world. Please don't send them
back to learn 
> Latin and Greek!
> 
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager