Ad
Ad
Ad
Poll
Question: Is soft proofing effective?
No, never use it - 1 (1.1%)
Sometimes - 18 (19.4%)
Better than no SP not a match - 18 (19.4%)
Yes, always use it - 51 (54.8%)
Just make a print! - 5 (5.4%)
Total Voters: 92

Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Soft proofing doesn’t work  (Read 29704 times)
jedbest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


« Reply #120 on: February 26, 2011, 08:29:11 PM »
ReplyReply

If soft proofing was not important than why would all the paper manufacturer's make icc profiles available for paper/printer combinations. If the manufacturer's think it is important than perhaps NAPP/Matt would be wise to re-evaluate their position.
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #121 on: February 26, 2011, 10:43:42 PM »
ReplyReply

The point of a soft proof is not to eliminate prints, but rather to give predicability and consistency when working using a monitor with the aim of producing a print.  It means you can reasonably anticipate what the changes you see on screen will look like in print such that, with experience, you can minimise the number of prints necessary to get the one you want.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7122


WWW
« Reply #122 on: February 26, 2011, 10:57:08 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know how highly regarded Rob Sheppard is in the printing world,

I don't know either because there hasn't been a poll. His Amazon sales rank is 157,366. Published in 2008 with 10 reviews. Schewe and Evening's Photoshop Ultimate Workshop was published a very short time ago, has 28 reviews and is 7516 in the sales rank (about 20 times better within several months). That should put things in perspective. And who is "the printing world" - it's people like you and me. As I said near the start of this thread, I like to keep my waste ratio down, so I use soft-proofing. But I understand there can many folks out there who think nothing of wasting materials by not using proven technologies, probably because they don't do enough critical print-making to care about it. But the educator needs to think beyond their love of iTunes and video games when it comes to dispensing advice on best practices FOR PRINTING.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5542


WWW
« Reply #123 on: February 26, 2011, 11:41:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Well...some people know how to make excellent prints, some people don't (but are still willing to write books about printing). I know what I know...ya know?

I know that soft proofing is an excellent (but not perfect) tool for helping to extract the maximum image quality of my digital captures.

If that is important; capture to print, then I'm inclined to leave nothing on the table. I know how to soft proof, I also know a bit about image sharpening...if you want the best, optimized images for final ink jet printing then you need to take a couple of steps to make sure you get the best you can get from your images.

If the "best" isn't important, you can omit a few steps and accept what you get after doing a proof print and twiddling a couple of adjustments. Is is the best potential outcome? No way...is it "good enough"? Probably for many people. Not for me.

I all depends on your expectations...do you want the best output? If the answer is yes, then why would you ever leave a stone unturned?

I think it boils down to expectations...my expectations are pretty high. Not everybody has those expectations...to say it bluntly, some people accept far less than what I would accept in final printed form. Like I said, I'm a pretty good printer...not everybody has those high expectations. I do.
Logged
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 570


WWW
« Reply #124 on: February 27, 2011, 07:54:21 AM »
ReplyReply

If soft proofing was not important than why would all the paper manufacturer's make icc profiles available for paper/printer combinations. If the manufacturer's think it is important than perhaps NAPP/Matt would be wise to re-evaluate their position.

Output ICC profiles (paper/printer) are necessary for printing, not just for soft proofing. As an example, LR does not have soft proofing, but you still use ICC profiles for printing.

Anyway, I believe in soft proofing and always use it.
Logged

PhilipCummins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 103


« Reply #125 on: February 27, 2011, 10:08:58 AM »
ReplyReply

And his comment twice on the blog that soft proofing doesn’t “solve” or help the prints are too dark issue, completely fails to recognize that the issue is improper display calibration! Or maybe he doesn’t even calibrate his display. That make more sense based on his take on how displays and prints correlate.

I'd say it's professional cognitive blindness in action from the so called "Expert Bias" and "Expectation Bias". When one reaches a perceived level of authority one can start to believe that one is correct by benefit of being an authority on a particular subject, and lead others to believe they are correct since they perceive them as an authority on a particular subject. They also have inherent expectations of what data they prefer and will not willingly admit they were incorrect if say, overwhelming data is displayed that shows they are indeed incorrect.

There's certainly enough biases to go around, it's important professionals keep an open mind over most (if not all) things they consider since it's easy to slip into the trap of assuming the way we're doing things now is still the best way of doing it. I'm not sure if it's worth arguing the case too strongly since their inherent biases will always argue that they are correct (especially in corner cases, post-rationalisation, etc), their egos demand it. For what it's worth, I've rarely met experts who willingly admit they were wrong...
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9312



WWW
« Reply #126 on: February 27, 2011, 10:51:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Output ICC profiles (paper/printer) are necessary for printing, not just for soft proofing.

Well they are not even necessary for that. As I wrote, you can alter RGB values till the cows come home and you get a desirable print without a calibrated display or an ICC profile (most print drivers provide means of bypassing ICC profiles). Color management is totally unnecessary if you have the time and money to make lots and lots of prints until you reach your goal.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
JRSmit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 416


WWW
« Reply #127 on: February 27, 2011, 01:38:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Glad i have profiles. They will get my cows home, in much less time and money Grin
Logged

Fine art photography: janrsmit.com
Fine Art Printing Specialist: www.fineartprintingspecialist.nl


Jan R. Smit
davidh202
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582


« Reply #128 on: February 27, 2011, 09:55:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I all depends on your expectations...do you want the best output? If the answer is yes, then why would you ever leave a stone unturned?

I think it boils down to expectations...my expectations are pretty high. Not everybody has those expectations...to say it bluntly, some people accept far less than what I would accept in final printed form. Like I said, I'm a pretty good printer...not everybody has those high expectations. I do.

Jeff, that very statement is so true, and about sums up the collective human experience. It doesn't only apply to printing. Every person on earth has different "expectations" of what he or she desires as a final outcome of their endeavors.To coin a phrase...
One mans trash, is another mans treasure.
That's what makes the world go round.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad