Digital BW, The Print

Steve,

> ... tagged or
> untagged a file will have been worked up in a particular workspace.  It
> will only look right in that space. 

We agree there.  I wasn't sure we were earlier.  

I recommend Gray Gamma 2.2 for the most part, and embedding GG 2.2 in a file
that is worked up in that space might be a good idea.  Photoshop Elements
users can do that if they have the settings right and check the right boxes
when saving.  Those are more "ifs" than one can count on, however.  Also,
those users are probably not aware of what space they are in unless they
look at the print preview information.  The Elements "Option 1," however,
defaults to the working spaces I recommend, thought it does not tag the
files.

For my own work, I'm starting to include in the name of the file what space
was used.  For example, my new files, worked up in Gray Gamma 2.2 include
GG22 in the name.

On the other hand, most of my files were worked up in GG 2.2, but with a
custom dot gain curve.  I suspect this is true for many people on this list,
as I started with the Piezo linearization standard and carried that over to
my curves for consistency.  This standard is closer to Dot Gain 20% than GG
2.2.  If a file is an 8 bit file and is closer to DG 20 than GG 2.2, then it
might be wise for that file to be tweaked in the space where it looks best.
This, however, may be a level of complexity that I don't want to recommend
for novices.  Just sticking to GG 2.2 might be best as a starting
recommendation. 


> ...  I am not familiar with Elements but
> can't imagine it isn't colour managed. 

While simplified and more limited, in some respects its color management is
better than CS2 for the novice -- in part because it is simplified.  For
example, with an untagged file it's very easy to switch between GG 2.2 and
Dot Gain 20% to see what the differences are and which one is going to look
best.  (Those names are not used in the Color Settings, however.) The
differences between "convert to" and "assigning" a profile don't exist.  In
Elements it's very easy to eliminate profiles -- for better or for worse --
just by opening when Color Settings are set to its Option 1 -- No Color
Management.  On half the Elements 4 programs I've seen, this is the default
setting in Color Settings.  

I understand that most of the frequent posters here use CS2, but in the
overall market, Elements is a much larger factor.  As a matter of principal,
I want to lower the barriers (costs and complexity) to high quality B&W.  As
such, I am tending to be sure my workflows make sense for Elements users.

> Recommending that people do NOT tag files when they have the capability to
> do so is a very bad idea, in my opinion.  You introduce the risk that for
> some reason that file gets opened in a workspace other than the one it was
> prepared in and people wonder why the look of the file has changed. 

I think we would agree that consistency is a goal.  The best way to get
there may be where we differ.  

GG 2.2 seems to be the most widely used standard.  However, unknown profiles
have been a major source of problems with my other workflows.  I'm not
certain where these profiles are coming from and whether they are generic or
device specific.  If the Elements users select their Option 1 -- No Color
Management -- it eliminates these profiles and the uncertainty they have
introduced in the past.  The system then defaults to GG 2.2.  The other
options are less predictable because they'll preserve the embedded profiles.

The issue for me is, in part, "What will cause the least amount of
problems?"  I'm currently thinking that eliminating variability by relying
on underlying defaults may be the better way to go.  I think there is a
reason Adobe has "Option 1" its "No Color Management" option -- which, in
fact, defaults to the working spaces that I think are best.


> No harm will ever come of a person who leaves their image tagged 
> with a non device specific workspace. 

That may be correct.  If they open that file in Elements with Option 1 in
Color Settings checked, that profile will be eliminated without any warning.


We do, also, need to be clear about whether we're talking about generic gray
working spaces or custom ICCs.  The custom profiles (I assume) are the ones
that cause the most trouble.  Often, however, people are unaware of what
their files are tagged with or what any of this means.  I have no idea what
these profiles are.  Thus I'm leaning toward just eliminating the whole
issue and relying on defaults for a starting position.


> The important thing is not to store working documents that
> have been converted to a device specific environment.  ...
> profile conversions to output spaces such as for printers should
> ordinarily be done 'on the fly' only.

We agree there also.  Again, I wasn't sure earlier.

Of course, the ICCs we're making with Create ICC are device specific.  Many
users here will want to use these to soft proof their files.  Here again, I
think for the novice, soft proofing with these ICCs should be ignored for
B&W, and in Elements it's virtually impossible to do so anyway.

> Basic colour management use is not hard or complicated, ...

The threads here would seem to argue against this position.

I'm more inclined to think the issue should be transparent, and systems
should work well when the user has no idea what color management is.  I
think the Adobe Option 1, "No Color Management" may be best understood as
saying, "If you don't understand color management, check this box."  Then
the defaults take over and, in the context of what I'm trying to do, seem to
work well.

> The types of profiles that one may
> encounter are not hard to categorize and understand - ie device specific
> (input and output, eg scanner and printer profiles) and 
> non device specific
> workspaces (GG2.2, Adobe RGB, ProphotoRGB, GG1.8 etc. ...

>... I'd rather people were provided with a good grounding and 
> practice which will serve them well as they learn more. 

In an ideal world that would be great.  However, I'm not sure anyone has
come up with a short and concise tutorial that people will read and
understand.  I tend to think that for novices letting the system go to a
default position and eliminating the variability might be best.

At least for this thread, I think we've narrowed and clarified our
differences, which is good.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com