On 15. nov 2004, at 11:15, Andrew Woods wrote:
Hi Thomas,In regard to profiling Sinar has made some, ahem, implementation decisions I strongly disagree about and has said as much in May when I first got the software.
I saw you demonstrating PM5 to profile a sinar back earlier this year.. At
that time you seemed reasonably optimistic....
At the In&out seminar we did a profile which we assigned in Photoshop because the colour implementation is captureshop's coloursettings weren't properly implemented.
Now you've had a good look, are you saying that using cpatureshop 5, it's
futile to expect to profile a sinarback (i.e. get results that will be
"better/more targeted" than sinar's own calibration system) unless one has a
high degree of profile making expertise?
It's not exactly futile, but it's an outright pain in the rear. Currently profiling a Sinarback does require a high degree of colour management oversight and some profile experience. Mind you if you are happy with what you get out of the box there isn't a problem. If you want to have a say over the "look" of your images through the profile then there is a problem.
I am not sure if your comments hear apply to sinar or not...."It's a long process if you want to get it right. Remember you need to build profile(s) that will fit almost anything as well as establish a proper workflow for the photographer/publisher/museum in question."
They do apply to Sinar as well as all other cameras.
Do you mean
that it's difficult but you've managed to get results on the sinar that you
deem better than without camera profiling, even if one has a target/aim
similar to that of the generic sinar system, can improvements be made?
If you are satisfied with what comes out of the box there is no point of changing setup. Just as if you like a particular film you wouldn't change because someone says it's better. Given the chance, however, most of us can find issues with both film or digital we'd perfer to be different.
It's difficult but possible. It just takes more than two to five times as long profiling a Sinarback, as when doing the same process on a camera using a "proper" colourmanagement implementation (say, Phase One, Imacon and possibly Leaf - although I haven't played with a Leaf for a few years so it is not something I'm prepared to stick my neck out promising.)
It's almost as if Sinar doesn't want users to deviate from their built in colour setting which, arguably, is good for many purposes.
Profiling excels when you have multiple different cameras you want the same look from, or a certain look. And if you do art reproduction none of the commercial solutions I've used/tested comes even close.
Best Regards, Thomas Holm / Pixl Aps
- Photographer, Educator, Colour Management Consultant & Seminar speaker - Remote Profiling Service (Output ICC profiles) - www.pixl.dk � Email: th[AT]pixl.dk --
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
