[argyllcms] Re: Number of patches - well behaved printer?
- From: Idea Digital Imaging <qcore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:36:35 +0000
On 25 Feb 2011, at 00:03, Rishi Sanyal wrote:
On Feb 24, 2011, at 7:57 AM, Idea Digital Imaging <qcore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
I meant that, seeing as neg/print is a two-stage process, the
result of whatever you are doing to get the image into a working
space for retouching *should* take into account the nature of the
paper that the neg would have been printed on.
I don't understand this either. The job of the input profile is to
map your capture (scan or digital) to standard CIEXYZ or CIELAB
values. You can then use this info to get your image into a standard
device independent color space. Now your image file is ready for
editing & subsequent output to any output device. Accuracy on the
output end will now depend on an accurate profile that maps CIEXYz
or CIELAB values to appropriate RGB values (or whatever space) for
the output device. And of course at this point it's desirable to
have an output device with a wide enough gamut to reasonably print
most of the colors in your scanned + edited image.
The photographer who asks us to drum scan colour negatives wants an
image that:
a. resembles the image they would get if they printed the negative on
photographic paper, or
b. resembles the original scene.
They clearly do NOT want a reproduction of the negative.
As I said, I'd like to see examples of profiled negative workflows, so
that I can see for myself what a negative is *really* supposed to look
like before we start editing it -- especially in cases where there is
nothing in the image that we can rely on to be black, white or a
neutral grey.
--
Martin Orpen
Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
Other related posts:
