Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Does CMM work on Win2000?

["Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <mlidaka@ameritech.net>]

Steve,

You are correct and I will change my ways.

Maris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Greenbank" <steve@gccl.fsbusiness.co.uk>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Does CMM work on Win2000?


| Surely you should archive with the correct profile where it is known. You
| can always ignore it later, but if you don't know what it is to start with
| you can never get the exact archive image back.
|
| Steve
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <mlidaka@ameritech.net>
| To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
| Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:59 PM
| Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Does CMM work on Win2000?
|
|
| > Yes, for the web.  But what about for print?  My understanding is that
| > colors outside of the sRGB gamut are printable, primarily cyans.
| >
| > My method, then, is to use Adobe or Bruce RGB for working with the
image,
| > then archive without any embedded color space, but convert to sRGB for
| > posting on the web.
| >
| > Maris
| >
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: "Rob Geraghty" <harper@wordweb.com>
| > To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
| > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 8:27 AM
| > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Does CMM work on Win2000?
| >
| > [snipped]
| >
| > | In the absence of expensive hardware and software to accurately
profile
| my
| > | whole setup, I'm beginning to think that sticking to sRGB is probably
| the
| > | simplest way out.
| > |
| > | Rob
| > |
| > |
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|