Re: CMYK separations: a correction

From: Katharine Thayer ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 12/18/04-06:58:02 AM Z
Message-id: <>

Okay, I figured it out, and you're right of course, it didn't have
anything to do with image size or resolution. It was in fact rather
stupid, though not entirely obvious. You were right the first time,
Mark, when you suggested that perhaps it might be something about the
order of inversion. Apparently I wasn't always inverting the image at
the same point in the process, and when I inverted at the wrong place,
that threw the separations off. So now I know (although I'm not sure
what good the information will do me since I never intend to make
another CMYK separation in my life). Thanks for suggestions and patience
while I figured this out,
Katharine wrote:
> Katherine,
> Can you repeat the results?† If not, and you get the appropriate
> results with the workflow that makes sense to you, then I wouldn't
> worry about it.† We all occasionally get results from out in left
> field, and it usually is something we absent-mindedly do, some setting
> that is weird and we don't notice.† I've had this happen with the
> Epson Printer Driver, thinking that a certain saved setting will
> repeat automatically and it doesn't, resulting in a negative that
> doesn't print as predicted.
> Mark
> In a message dated 12/18/04 2:34:45 AM, writes:
> Okay, I believe you, but if so, then what is this other
> thing that could
> logically be causing this? I'm quite willing to believe it's
> something
> unbelievably stupid I'm doing, but I'd be happy anyway just
> to know what
> it is
> Katharine
> Mark Nelson
> Purchase the eBook & System for Your Own Custom Workflow@
> Precision Digital Negatives
> PDN's Own 31-Step Tablet Now Available‚*”produced by Stouffer
> Industries
> Credit Card & Paypal now accepted
> Workshop info on Home Page
Received on Sat Dec 18 14:54:11 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 01/03/05-09:29:44 AM Z CST