RE: LS-2000 help

["Sokolowski, Ed" <esokolowski@xxxxxxxxx>]

I have NEVER seen such a simple subject made SOOOOO complex. God bless you
...... What does all this have to do with Harold Wong's question? 
What are you saying, REALLY. Are you saying that what I have said wont
work??? Are you saying that you dont agree and there is another method that
is better for the situation I was responding to.  What does all this stuff
have to do with getting better scans on a LS-2000 scanner. Please enlighten
me I dont understand. 
The simple fact of the matter is that RGB and CMYK are totally different.
One is additive color and one is subtractive. Dont you think a person
starting out with all this should learn the basics color theory before he
gets involved in all this nonsence. Or are you one of those guys that
believe in all the hype that is assoated with most of the products that you
mentioned and thinks that using them will somehow make everything better??? 

Flame away!!!

 Oh Yeah..... Press Ready PU What a stink bomb!!!!!!


> ----------
> From: 	Ernst Dinkla
> Reply To: 	panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: 	Tuesday, August 8, 2000 12:15 PM
> To: 	'panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: 	RE: LS-2000 help
> 
> In <URL:news:lokaal.panorama> on Tue 08 Aug, Sokolowski, Ed wrote:
> > Ernst,
> > 
> > I was not aware of that.... I am not sure why Epson would convert CMYK
> to
> > RGB to pring on CMYK sounds Like they are trying to correct the problem
> I
> > was talking about. Users printing RGB to CMYK printers. Our Epson 5000's
> and
> > 7000's are balenced for the press so that the output from either machine
> > MATCHES the output from the press. All files are CMYK.
> 
> If an Epson isn't used for prepress proofing, other factors are more
> important:
>   
> * there are several reasons to stay as long as possible in an RGB
> colourspace, for example for editing and for use in other media
> or other processes: lambda, hexachrome. The graphic industry is
> adapting that approach as well.
> * if a wider colourspace than Colormatch RGB is used than the Epson
> CMYK dye inks can deliver a wider gamut than what is possible in offset
> CMYK.
> * it could well be that the excellent dithering of the normal Epson
> driver is only possible with the internal RGB to CMYK conversion.
> An equal dithering is hard to find in RIPs, though PressReady is almost
> getting there. The Pixelis RIP actually uses the Epson dithering. The
> good dithering of the Epson driver compromises on colourcontrol though,
> something that is also the found in the Pixelis RIP.
> 
> > The press that we send the final to RQUIRES CMYK Wouldnt it be better
> > workflow to make only one document that represents the final output
> insted
> > of one for proofing and one for press..........??? 
> 
> Maybe, the last would be better if you are using the Epsons as a proof
> printer. That means buying a RIP to drive the Epson. Wasatch, BEST, Onyx
> etc will drive the 5000 and 7000 in CMYK style. And for the Epson models
> below the 5000 you could use PressReady (though rumour has it that Adobe
> ceases development on PR, one year after its launch!). You will need
> CMYK ICC profiles in your RIP for the Epson and different CMYK ICC
> profiles in the RIP for the imagesetter.
> 
> If you use the normal Epson driver for prepress work you need RGB ICC
> profiles and for the imagesetter RIP CMYK ICC profiles. It becomes more
> complex. That and less colour control (especially on black) in the Epson
> driver makes it hard to get a decent proof.
> 
> It doesn't mean however that the image has to be CMYK. There are
> even RIPs that can apply the right profiles to both an RGB and a CMYK
> image that are on the same page in the file. In general the trend is to
> stay in RGB and let the RIP do the conversion with the appropriate
> profiles for proof printer and image setter.
> 
> Ernst
> -- 
> Ernst Dinkla  Serigrafie,Zeefdruk            The point will never be
> metric
> 
>