Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Thu, 07 Jan 1999 18:19:56 -0500 (EST)
On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, Donald S. Bryant wrote:
> Judy,
>
> What I think you are describing here is an attempt to define the color Gamut of a
> color gum print. I assume you are making seperation transparences with Photoshop
> on an ink jet printer (if I'm wrong please forgive me) which increases the
> difficulty of controling variables defining each ouput media or devices color
> space.
>
> I'm by no means a Photoshop expert as I'm pretty much a neophyte but it seems to
> me this is what all of this discussion of CMYK boils down to.
>
> Don
Well maybe, but I'm printing out the separations on a postscript laser
printer on plain paper and waxing them (paraffin) which I will write up
directions for because I've finessed some of the pitfalls. (Can you
finesse a pitfall? I think so.) In any event, as I noted in all that
verbiage somewhere, I found the contrast *range* the same on transparency
material and plain paper, and the tendency to banding about the same as
well. There's just the cost of the transparency on the one side of the
ledger & the trouble of waxing on the other.... both of them slight.
But my point, which I evidently failed to make, was that the output is
only the BEGINNING of what I take for what you call "the gamut
definition." It has to be co-ordinated with the pigment, the mix, the
paper, the exposure, AND the development... probably the temperature,
humidity, light source & your love life, as well, and all of these have to
be coordinated with each other.
PS. I bought two new blacks today: Mars & something else I never heard of.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:40