"keith" wrote in message
On Feb 16, 5:29 am, "Toobi-Won Kenobi" <Toobi-won > wrote:
"keith" wrote in message
On Feb 15, 6:42 pm, "Toobi-Won Kenobi" <Toobi-won > wrote:
"keith" wrote in message
On Feb 15, 4:35 am, "Toobi-Won Kenobi" <Toobi-won > wrote:
"keith" wrote in message
On Feb 14, 3:30 pm, "Moira Riddell" wrote:
I have been trying to get "White" backgrounds, I have used in camera,
and
followed up with CS3. Unfortunately, when I print my pictures out, I still
seem to have a grey tinge.
What do I need to do to get white backgrounds?
I look forward to hearing any hints/tips you can offer me.
Thank you in advance
Moira
You probably don’t have white selected. The default white will give you that. Or open the colour picker and check that the values are set to zero.
Zero?
My "default" white is 254 in RGB , though in levels I use 243 in RGB (ensure
detail in highlights)
Also, some printers allow you to set the profile of the paper you are using
to ensure screen white and paper white
matchhttp://www.computer-darkroom.com/ps8_colour/ps8_1.htmht tp://www.compu…
TWK
I was presuming we’re not speaking of highlites, or portions inside an image. but a plain white background around something – in other words, no background. In which case knock out the backround around the image or spec the default white, which is essentially a knock out as well. Keith
No background = nothing to print, therefore it takes on the colour of the
paper as in a "white" stroke
If the white in the OP’s problem is printing gray (yet white on screen) then
it is some sort of calibration problem.
If 254 cubed is being sent to the printer (in effect a print nothing instruction) but is being interpreted as lower values and showing up as gray, it is a pr nter calibration problem.
If white is not 254 cubed when examined in the colour palette but looks white on screen it is a monitor calibration problem.
TWK- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –
I work with offset. Although my screen is pretty accurate, the colour that shows up on the screen, to me, is neither here nor there. Same goes for what comes off my ink jet.
That is quite a statement, how can you possibly apply colour corrections to
an image when you do not know that the colours you see on screen is accurate or not?
Skin tones for example have a habit of not conforming to Pantone colours. TWK- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –
To answer your question. You can’t. But you’d be surprised what monitors people use and expect accuracy, or they think they can calibrate it to get accuracy. It ain’t gonna happen.
I also said that my monitor is pretty darned accurate. Obviously I was referring more specifically to solid areas. My point being that from one monitor to the next a solid colour can seem lighter or darker. In the case of an image of a person for example, obviously screen accuracy is essential. Unfortunately not all are able to own a monitor to reflect such accuracy. But using a solid colour as an example, it matters not what shows up on the monitor. It’s the colour specified by the numbers that matters. To sum up, a person’s crappy monitor or home ink jet cannot be relied upon for representation of the true image. It’s why clients show up at the time of printing (offset printing) for press proofs.
Sure, if a person has a $2,000. monitor and $2,000. home printer and the colours were still off, some adjustment is in order. However if a person has a $200. monitor and a $200. home printer, one is limited as to what they can do. It’s why printers suggest buying a colour match proof for $50.00 if the colour is critical.
Just 2 weeks ago I had a proof from the printer. A solid brown area was too light & yellow. This was because I first speced it as a spot colour and then let InDesign handle the conversion to CMYK. A check of the latest edition of the Pantone spot to process showed that InDesign’s conversion was way off. I punched in the numbers from the latest Pantone conversion and ta daa, all was well.
Anyways; I’m sure you must know what I mean.
We have different "problems", if I shoot a portrait, manipulate it, send it off to the lab and it comes back looking as if the sitter was either seasick or from Venus, then that is one sale lost along with a little bit of reputation.
My customers see the results of my efforts, framed in their hands, not usually on a monitor.
I therefore need to know that the colours I see on my monitor will appear in the final print.
I take you point about the colour rendition of some of the cheaper monitors but anything that can display an RGB image can be calibrated to reflect the colours truthfully.
I learnt many moons ago never to confuse quality and price; just because something is more expensive doesn’t necessarily mean that it is better. I have seen some horrendous colours an some very expensive monitors. Given the choice between an expensive uncalibrated monitor and a discount special calibrated one, I think I know which one I would believe. Regards
TWK
