[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Colorvision RGB Profiler; good or bad???



<x-flowed>>Bruce,
>
>Please forgive my denseness, but, how are you doing this?
>
>Thanks (again) - Philip Kagan
>

Ah.

For simple white-point editing, I usually use GretagMacbeth's 
ProfileMaker Pro. For more complex edits, I use Kodak ColorFlow. 
They're both pro tools with price tags to match.

I don't generally use scanner-based profiling tools, though I've 
investigated most of the current crop. With Profiler RGB, I've 
generally found that unless the output is really way off, it's better 
to accept the print rendition and concentrate on editing the preview 
side to get an accurate soft proof, then edit the image inside the 
soft proof rather than look for a profile that renders every image 
perfectly with no intervention. Even high-end spectro-based tools 
probably won't make a profile that does equal justice to every image. 
But if you can see what the print's going to look like before you 
make it, you can intervene to make it better.

Bruce
-- 
bruce@pixelboyz.com
-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.

</x-flowed>

[Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Scanner]     [Gimp]     [Gimp] Users

Powered by Linux