|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
So, John, what do you recommend for printer profiles. I keep thinking about all the different papers/ ink combos I might use over the next few years. Won't the cost of getting profiles for each become prohibitive? Or could I start, say, from a profile produced for Epson paper/ ink and then adjust from that myself (via Photoshop and printer driver)? Still searching for the right way to go, Cathy -----Original Message----- From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Jon Cone Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 7:30 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Roland ink made by Epson ? No,I've been told...Now e-mail me off group! > To All, > I have been going through these same questions as I try to decide which > profile package to buy. > It is unfortunate that the threat or practice of censoring commercial > responses encourages him to take this "biz matters"off line. The > clarifications of these issues on paper, ink and software benefit all. > Please lets keep these topics open and free flowing. > Ira If it's okay then I will reply online. The Sequel Chroma IV has a feature that permits soft-keying. In other words, should a manufacture decide to, the instrument can be made to only work with a certain software application. So far it appears that Monaco is not utilizing this feature. I do not know if that will change. Prove it! has been designed to work with a number of different instruments including the Sequel IV, Colortron II, Spectrolina, DTP 92, CRT Calibrator, and Gamma Scientific 9400. Prove it! can be utilized with a large number of instruments which makes begging or borrowing a colorimeter much easier! I happen to know that Epson does not make Roland's inks. As for which profile package to buy. My advice is to purchase Prove it! and professionally rendered profiles. Professionally rendered profiles will deposit far more ink on that paper than EZ Color rendered profiles, as well as cleaner highlights on off white papers. Profiling a scanner is not essential (flameproof) because scanners drift too often for profiling to be a practical application in one's spontaneous workflow. Besides, a calibrated and profiled monitor can be used as a source and a scanned image can easily be tweaked on one's cal'd and prof'd monitor. Before the flamethrowers start, I do recognize the value of a scanner profile, I just don't believe it is worth giving up professionally rendered profiles for when cost is the issue. If you want to do it yourself, invest in MatchBox because it offers far more superior profiles than EZ. At $500 more, it is worth that in the time alone that you would spend correcting and tweaking EZ Color profiled prints. One last way of looking at it is that I believe that the $500 cost of EZ Color is worth the monitor calibration and profiling as well as the scanner profiling. I just believe that the printer profiles are lacking. -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- Jon Cone http://www.inkjetmall.com http://www.cone-editions.com/workshops -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users