On Tuesday 27 November 2001 13:10, Robert L Krawitz wrote: <snip> > I can imagine professional use of a program without any of these > things these days (the font stuff is most likely to be an issue). A > lot of printers that get professional use have Mac/Windows drivers > that take exclusively RGB data. A more serious issue is the lack of > color matching, so that there's no guarantee that what shows on the > screen will match what's on the page. Yes, but then we're still talking about printers here. The colour posters I designed were printed as well (on a "digital press" as they called it, which from what I gather is just an industrial strength printer), but that only goes up to A3, and the colours aren't that good (especially the orang bits came out a bit faded). All the other stuff my university printed for the anniversary was four-colour printed, which means CMYK. The website at http://www.bobs.co.uk/print/4colourProcess.html suggests that most stuff is CMYK too. Anyway, we're getting off-topic here. Perhaps I was wrong and CMYK isn't that important as you can always convert to it from RGB in Photoshop. But then you still need to have Photoshop. Colour matching is a problem anyway, because you'd need to tune your monitor as well. With xgamma and the gimp-print drivers I managed to match my monitor and printed output reasonably well, perhaps good enough for an amateur like me, but I guess a professional would like WYSIWYG colour-wise. Lourens
