CompuServe Messages

<<So what your saying is that there is no automatic way to make sure that the file I render in 3DS and see with the colors that are correct will turn out exactly the same on a print ? I must be missing something here cause I cannot believe that handing over a diskette with a TIF on it and saying to the bureau that the file needs to be 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 and that ther might need to be more done to it..>> Welcome to the wonderful world of printing and monitor calibration(G). If what you believe is true and there is an automatic way to guarentee exact results in printing then one would feel free to order 10,000 copies of something without proofs. No one in their right mind would do this; everyone gets proofs to check the output before printing an order because, believe it, there is no 100% predictable results in printing from a digital file without proofing. You mention your monitor but if you were to look at several monitors side by side showing the same image there would be differences. Which monitor shows the true image? Since monitors start out different, get more different with age and are adjusted out of factory settings by users, its clear that one cannot regard any particular monitor as a perfect standard. At the printers end different machines have different output characteristics and need to be calibrated too. On top of this TIF files are RGB which is a different color space than the CMYK system used in printing. You can test this by converting a very vivid TIF image with lots of intense colors into a PSD in Photoshop, then look at them side by side. You can see the difference. So there are all kinds of ways that things can get out of whack. You may get perfect results one time or several times, but you may not, and probably wont, without some attention to calibrating your monitor to the specific printing device you use for output. Kodak and other software companies are trying hard to perfect monitor and scanner calibration software so these problems will be mitigated. The best solution Ive found was to calibrate the gamma settings in photoshop so they matched ( as close as possible ) the prints I was getting from the service bureau. Now Im calibrated so my monitor matches the printed output (and Im not wasting $40 a pop on Iris prints that dont look right) . <<Ok so you bring it in as a TIF or JPEG.. any idea by the way if a file that is a JPEG at say 2000 x 3000 will give as good an image to send to the printer as a 2000 by 3000 TIF ? I ask since it can be easier to transfer a 500 K JPEG than a 7 meg TIF..>> I will say it again, this is a predictable method ONLY if you provide the service bureau with CMYK files; with TIFs the printer is making the conversion and he has not seen your monitor. So both JPG and TIF have potential problems. If you insist on sending an RBG file I would run tests to check if the compression causes problems that are unacceptable to you. I think that certain types of images show artifacts more especially along hard edges and flat color areas. There are lots of variables here and people write text books on this stuff, its that complex. Im not an expert but Ive understood it well enough to get predictable results. Your amazement that this isnt a totally nailed down and predictable process reminds me of how indignant I was when I found out that color photographic paper cannot be produced with consistant sensitivity and therefore light settings in the enlarger must be changed for each batch of paper. It may look like science but its an art too. Good luck Ed