tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post5527796380441000409..comments2024-03-27T00:32:29.877-07:00Comments on Photos and Stuff: Serendipityamolitorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-69654096028089289762016-07-19T19:03:29.220-07:002016-07-19T19:03:29.220-07:00What a marvelous compliment! I am always very grat...What a marvelous compliment! I am always very gratified when something I say somehow makes sense to someone. Thank you.<br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-61960585961346325492016-07-19T18:51:30.115-07:002016-07-19T18:51:30.115-07:00"With properly functioning color management t..."With properly functioning color management that will literally never happen. It can't. The purpose of color management is, literally, to prevent that from happening. Digital technology enables, encourages, methods of ensuring repeatability. It encourages us to convert the entire process of Art Making into a sort of assembly line. It, essentially, leaves you all alone in the process of Art Making. You have to make all the choices yourself, you have to know a priori what you're trying to do. A proper muse knows when to knock over a paint pot. A proper artist should know this, and not nail the paint pots to the bench. Too many paint pots too firmly fixed and, I claim, the muse simply leaves in a huff. Figure it out yourself, asshat, she says, and like mist she is gone. <br /><br />Automate what seems right to you, but from time to time, throw it all out and start anew. Give your muse a little room to work. "<br /><br />This is easily, hands down, the most brilliant assessment of the state of digital printing I've read in the last decade. Thanks for saying what I've been thinking and struggling with for the past several years (art making vs assembly line automation).TGhttp://www.timothygrayphoto.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-28610193299723887862016-07-19T17:08:24.471-07:002016-07-19T17:08:24.471-07:00Yeah, he's claiming 4.5 dE which should be per...Yeah, he's claiming 4.5 dE which should be perceptible, if it's actually rendering. While I assume Mark embedded the right profile bits in the thing. If you're rendering the JPEG with a chain that respects the profile, that has a profile for the monitor, then all that's left to worry about is whether or not the monitor's profile actually retains a difference between the colors on the screen. It certainly *could* crush them to the same color, or render then as substantially fewer dE apart.<br /><br />All that said, 4.5 dE ought to be perceptible. 1.0 "ought" to be, but I guess it's not always.<br /><br />It just seems weird to me when people put this stuff up on the web.<br /><br />Anyways, the larger point is, I hope, clear: Digital workflows tend to lean toward a "perfect it, and then lock it down, and then forget it" pattern, which is not always what we want. Lots and lots of people, though, seem to think that it in fact *is* what we want.<br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-69239468032817036642016-07-19T14:00:18.156-07:002016-07-19T14:00:18.156-07:00Well, for what it's worth, I saw clear differe...Well, for what it's worth, I saw clear difference between the blues and between the greens in Segal's patches. And yes, my monitor is calibrated. I'd hate to have skin tones left to the whims of the latest version of PS.<br /><br />How about looking for the opportunities for happy accidents in Camera Raw, or Capture, or LIghtroom? Much cheaper than printing!erickehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01409165571476557979noreply@blogger.com