Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: "Auto" or "Assisted" Soft Proofing  (Read 1925 times)
solardarkroom.com
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


WWW
« on: June 11, 2009, 04:12:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I have been using the Jeff Schewe method of Soft Proofing in PS since watching the wonderful "Camera to Print" series from LL and it's been a genuine asset at the final crucial stage of printing. However the computer nerd in me can't help imagining that this process could at least be assisted if not automated in software. If all I'm doing is compensating for the difference between the image on screen and the (dull and lifeless) version via Soft Proof, could there be an algorithm that gets us from point A to B? All the colour spaces are accurately quantified and there is extensive knowledge on the human visual system from photon through perception. As it is, the task is unique to each image and some are harder than others to match (dark greens and browns for example) but I can't help thinking there are reasons for this that are already understood, quantified and ready to be programmed into a really cool plugin.

Any thoughts?

David
www.solardarkroom.com

PS This pipe-dream was brought on by severe carpal tunnel and a flood of late night printing to meet a deadline.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5468


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2009, 04:23:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: solardarkroom.com
Any thoughts?


Yep...it's that "thinking" thing that would keep it from being automated.

All the color scientists working on color management would LOVE to be able to come up with something that could adjust an image based on output parameters. But the problem is that you needs eyes and a brain to be able to make the final decision.

You can already create an action that will auto-create a pair of adjustments (curves and Hue&Sat) and make a layer group and even pre-select the correct soft proof condition after duplicating the original image. Heck you could even turn the action into an F key. So then all ya gotta do is hit a key then activate the adjustment and twiddle.

But to have some algorithm make the adjustments would mean teaching it image aesthetics which is a bit harder than making profiles.
Logged
solardarkroom.com
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2009, 04:39:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Schewe
Yep...it's that "thinking" thing that would keep it from being automated.

All the color scientists working on color management would LOVE to be able to come up with something that could adjust an image based on output parameters. But the problem is that you needs eyes and a brain to be able to make the final decision.

You can already create an action that will auto-create a pair of adjustments (curves and Hue&Sat) and make a layer group and even pre-select the correct soft proof condition after duplicating the original image. Heck you could even turn the action into an F key. So then all ya gotta do is hit a key then activate the adjustment and twiddle.

But to have some algorithm make the adjustments would mean teaching it image aesthetics which is a bit harder than making profiles.

Jeff,

Thanks for your reply. I actually did create some actions hoping to have one for each paper stock but of course found myself always having to custom tweak each image. Some fall into place instantly and others require more effort. I simply thought the collective body of knowledge and data might eventually lead to a magic bullet.

Thanks for sharing your techinque in the first place! It has become part of my routine.

David
Logged
Jack Varney
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 392


WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2009, 07:02:05 PM »
ReplyReply

"Is theory ever a substitute for Duct tape?"

Down here theory can never replace duct tape. However, often times when "stuck" on a print adjustment, I find WD40 works best.  
Logged

Jack Varney
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad