> Thanks Tony, Anthony, and Austin for contributing to this thread. It
> seems there is a 3:1 majority here who thinks CMYK isn't of any use to
> the (digital) photographer.
I don't think that is a legitimate conclusion to draw based on their posts.
For example, Tony did not say that CYMK isn't of any use to the digital
photographer; that is your interpretation. He said that it may not be of any
significance in terms of generating color separations in you are not
involved with the production of press runs. Those that print to a desktop
printer (inkjet or laser) may not have to be concerned with CYMK separations
or with CYMK conversions since the printer will do the conversions from RGB
to CYMK for you; but that does not mean that the CYMK color space is
irrelevant and isn't of any use to a digital photographer - especially a
professional one. The way I read the posts it is 3:1 majority who disagree
with your conclusions.
> This is great, but it implies that the CMYK file is made for
> one and only one printer, so whenever a company buys a new printer
> that is different from the old ones in colour rendition, they have to
> discard (or adapt) their old CMYK files.
Technically this is true with respect to RGB also, since the ICC profile for
a given printer is or should be a dedicated one dependent on the inkset and
media being used such that it will need to be re-established with each
change in those variables if one is to come close to being right on and
since those ICC profiles will also change everytime one changes from one
particular device to another (i.e., particular instance of a given make and
model printer to another instance of that make and model). That we cheat
and use more generic profiles to avoid constant development of new profiles
does not mean that this make the use of ICC profiles for RGB digital devices
different from the use of similar generalized CYMK profiles or standards
like SWOP.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Major A
> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 11:36 AM
> To: laurie@advancenet.net
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: CMYK rant (was Digital Darkroom Computer
> Builders?)
>
>
>
> > > Here is why I don't think it's necessary to have a CMYK
> colour space
> > > for image manipulation:
> >
> > CMYK is essential for people doing the whole prepress
> workflow so that what
> > they produce goes straight to a printer as an EPS or PDF.
> EG a photographer
> > producing his own postcards or posters or book who has
> control over every
> > aspect including the paper stock, inks and lithographic
> process. For anyone
> > else, just ignore it unless you like it.
>
> Thanks Tony, Anthony, and Austin for contributing to this thread. It
> seems there is a 3:1 majority here who thinks CMYK isn't of any use to
> the (digital) photographer.
>
> If, as Anthony said, CMYK is useful for printing work, then it only
> makes sense to use CMYK if you do it in the colour space of the
> printer AND convert to RGB using ICC colour profiles for display on
> screen. This is great, but it implies that the CMYK file is made for
> one and only one printer, so whenever a company buys a new printer
> that is different from the old ones in colour rendition, they have to
> discard (or adapt) their old CMYK files. Also, more and more
> high-quality magazines etc. use more than 4 colours, in which case the
> entire method becomes useless.
>
> My suggestion here is the obvious one -- why don't we all work in
> CIELab or XYZ and convert to RGB for on-screen display and CMYK for
> printing? The conversion to RGB can be done via CMYK, so that the RGB
> display gives a good preview of the actual printed image. One still
> needs to have an idea of how the gamuts of screen and printer differ,
> but that's no different when working in CMYK.
>
> Thus, I think CMYK is historical dead weight which has been obsolete
> at least since the ICC standard was created.
>
> Andras
>
> ==============================================================
> =============
> Major Andras
> e-mail: andras@users.sourceforge.net
> www:
> ==============================================================
> =============
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with
> 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
> or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the
> message title or body
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
