The little program ADOBE GAMMA that appears in the Control Panel of Windows after the installation of Photoshop CS2 has now disappeared from CS3.
For whatever reason it has not been included I do not know, but then I find this little colour management to adjust the screen to match colours has been of great importance to people like me - 4 Colour Offset Output on printing ink. This is because the program that comes with the graphic cards do not favour cmyk colours but more on rgb.
So I appeal to ADOBE - Bring back the adobe gamma in the next upgrade so that I do not have to install both CS2 AND CS3 to utilize Adobe Gamma.
that's probably the best solution for the pro buko (and the OP sounds like one), but for the rest of us, adobe gamma was just fine. they package the app on a dvd. you'd think they'd be able to dump a little 1 meg utility on there, unless they have a deal with the hardware calibration companies to NOT ship adobe gamma.
The "deal" is that Adobe Gamma was kinda okay with CRTs but completely falls apart with LCD screens, which are rapidly replacing everyone's aging CRTs. I'm not sure what the big deal is about keeping older versions of Ps around if that's what you need to do. As far as I'm concerned you don't have to be a professional to warrant spending a couple hundred bucks, but if you are sending files to offset, you're definitely more than just a hobbyist.
>The "deal" is that Adobe Gamma was kinda okay with CRTs
I have a lacie iv electron blue 22" that i spent pretty good money on. i don't plan on tossing it anytime soon. for the size of the files, i think they should include them, or at least wrap em in a downloadable package available in the downloads area.
>. I'm not sure what the big deal is about keeping older versions of Ps around if that's what you need to do.
I don't have one, really. i have cs2 and cs3 on my system. but cs4 is coming out soon. how many should i realistically have to keep around? again, think of the size of the file we're talking about!
>but if you are sending files to offset, you're definitely more than just a hobbyist.
>As far as I'm concerned you don't have to be a professional to warrant spending a couple hundred bucks
but i just spent a couple hundred on ps itself! and ... and... :)
Dave, you know what I mean: If the tool is so expensive and we have reached a point past the so-called eyeball calibration, shouldn't we (I mean the socalled 'pros' or semipros) promote better practices?
To me asking for Adobe gamma sounds a bit like asking for the return of the corset.
A good feature request could be asking for the inclusion of a cheap colorimetre in the Photoshop price... or of a discount coupon to buy one.
np. i understand. <br /><br />>or of a discount coupon to buy one. <br /><br />that's an idea, but again, besides the point. it's such a small file why not include it or offer it for download? people obviously want it, because we keep seeing posts on it. unless there's some back room deal we don't know about. <shrug>
Unfortunately, when technology changes, you sometimes have to spend money to keep up with it. While I would not waste my money on the least expensive calibrators available, I do consider the money for an EyeOne well worth it. It's worth it in knowing that you're calibrated and your files are right. It's worth it in the savings you'll see in fewer rounds of prints to get a good one or proofs if that's your choice. Sure, you CAN use the old file on an LCD, but it really doesn't work very well. I hate to say it, but when you're in the imaging game at any level, you sometimes need to spend a few dollars (or a few thousand) in order to do things right.
Radius PressView $2500
Barco Ref V $4500
3 Sony Artisans @ $1500
Praxisoft Profiler $2000
Spectrolino T $6000
DTP-92 Calibrator $ 600
In the last ten years just a few of the items purchased in the quest for better and more predictable color. Admittedly I am a professional, but it just illustrates what you can spend if you're so inclined. And notice that the best calibrator of years past - the DTP-92 - was over three times what a modern EyeOne goes for today. A couple hundred really isn't much.
While not disputing the need to calibrate, it is important to realise that many of the posters on this forum are
not professionals and to them the outlay for a hardware calibration system may be more than they can easily afford.
I have helped many users to get their monitors profiled with Adobe Gamma and other software solutions and, while it is not an acceptable method for guaranteed colour precision, it
will get rid of obvious colour casts.
In many cases that is enough. If their results from the printer are OK for them, they are happy.