[argyllcms] Re: IT8 target
- From: Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 07:58:43 -0700
On Sep 20, 2016, at 6:20 PM, Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not sure "playing around" and avoiding spending money add up to the same
thing though - typically there is a lot of work in getting these things right.
Let me echo this.
The only way "playing around" makes sense is if you've got complete control
over the equipment. That pretty much means you own it, and the equipment isn't
cheap. And even if it's a friendly boss letting you screw around with it on
your off-hours, you're still going to go through a fair amount of consumables
(paper, ink, cycle counts, printheads, whatever). No mater what, you're looking
at a fair investment of your own time.
That's why it's similarly not cheap to hire somebody else to do it for you.
They've got to recuperate their own similar costs, plus they have to pay rent,
plus they have to make a profit.
Also note that it's not exactly in the interests of the service bureaus to let
people have unrestricted control over the equipment -- even if it's just
digital settings. Unless you have sufficient expertise, you're not going to get
good results...and the people with expertise don't need your equipment because
they've got their own. Much worse, people tend to want refunds when they don't
get good results...and badmouth bureaus when they don't get refunds. If there's
a business case to be found for such a service, I don't think I could make it.
If you want to get your chops up to speed on the cheap, get any old inkjet
printer and an Argyll-supported spectrometer. The spectrometer will be the
expensive part (until you realize how much ink and paper you're going through
making test prints), but the ColorMunki shouldn't break the bank and there're
likely some good deals to be found on used equipment. When you can make that
printer sing, you'll be in a good position to decide if that's something you
want to do on a large scale...in which case you'll still probably be better off
with inkjet than photoprinting, but that's another holy war....
Other related posts: