In Andrew Rodney’s excellent book, “Color Management for Photographers”, in a tutorial section, he describes how to illustrate the result of a “bad” printer profile (by using an intentionally messed up profile from the CD that comes with the book that you load in PS and view the nasty results that Soft Proofing would show). This was a good idea, and it gives the reader an idea of how things can go wrong.
How about an example of what to expect when things go “as well as possible”? Typically, authors describe their view of an acceptable match between screen and print as, well, “acceptable”, “spot on”, “good enough”, or something like that. As well they might, for how do you describe with words the results of comparing a soft proof in PS (on your calibrated monitor) with a print (made on your printer)?
Is there anyone (Andrew, are you out there?) who could create two files: one reference file (of some test image, perhaps Digital Dog’s), and a “faked” version of this file which, when viewed on the faker’s (calibrated) monitor matches “acceptably” the variations/deviations he sees in comparing the monitor image to the print (made on his printer)?
In the creation of the file that mimics what he sees on the print, he’d make some adjustments to simulate what he sees on his printed output. Perhaps the print shows less saturation than the monitor’s soft proof, a slight green cast, whatever. He would adjust the faked “print” version to show, in his opinion, an “acceptable” match between print and screen. In effect, he would compare the faked print file in PS (using some output profile) with the original and be able to say: “The faked file (compared to the un-adjusted file) represents what I subjectively feel is the acceptable difference between a soft proof (as seen on my monitor) and the print I made of it (on my printer) using a good output profile”.
The rest of us would download these files, and compare them in PS (on our calibrated monitors), and hopefully get a better idea, from an experienced profiler, of what an “acceptable” match between screen and print is.
Or am I off on this: is such an approach impossible or wrong-headed?
