![]() Photoshop 16-bit color mode provides 32768 shades for both. 8-bit color mode has only 256 shades of RGB channels and 100 of CMYK channels. If you want smooth gradients in Photoshop you should use 16-bit color mode instead of 8-bit. For most practices Adobe RGB and sRGB are more than good enough. In my experience the best working space profile for gradients in ECI-RGB v2 freely available on the website of eci.org. In short when you create gradients and want them to be very linear you should work in RGB color space. Also sRGB and Adobe RGB1998 are actually representations of average monitor color spaces but they are linear. Even though a great effort has been put into the construction of these profiles they are not linear. CMYK profiles such as Swop or Fogra39 are characterizations of offset presses. When you're working in CMYK color space you're working with a synthetic device profile. Word of advice: just buy an Eizo CG series monitor. SpectraCal, ArgyllCMS/Displa圜al)can't compete with the Eizo hardware calibration in my experience. Therefore it's better to use hardware calibration available in Eizo monitors with integrated calibration device. LUT-tables are prone to rounding errors, bad measurements and linearity issues caused by the software. Software calibration uses the LUT-tables of your videocard. The main reason why you see banding on your monitor is because you use a software calibration. If so, please do mark my reply as "helpful" and if you're OK now, please mark it as " correct answer" so others who have similar issues can see the solution Because you need the colour management to be active don't forget to switch back to the display profile. It's not going to give you good colour management, for that you must have an accurate display screen profile, but it will dump the calibration LUT so you can see your file shown without it's effect. Go to system preferences / displays / color and rather than selecting a display profile, try selecting the sRGB profile, now click back into Illustrator. There is a workaround, I'll explain how to do it on a Mac. They had to, because high end users were refusing to switch from CRT screens (which, generally, did not have the problem). Because frustration with this symptom in pre-press and design, Eizo & NEC came up with "hardware calibration" to solve it. So, in short the faults you see may not be in the file you've made, just a fault in the display system. It's not usually dead straight lines, those are usually "banding" caused by a printer head fault. ![]() This can cause "contouring" or "posterisation" (where there are not enough steps of digital detail to provide a fully smooth gradation). What this means is that on the way to the display the data making up an image can undergo some pretty significant corrections (like a set of curves). ![]() When calibrating and profiling "Normal" the software creates a calibration look up table (LUT) which is loaded into the computer video card, the screen is then profiled. If the printer is definitely OK then it could be a screen issue - I am guessing you're using an LCD (flat screen) type and not an Eizo Coloredge or NEC Spectraview display? The Coloredge and Spectraview have a hardware calibration that stops this happening. Try rotating the image - does the issue rotate with it? However if they really are horizontal lines (across the paper width) then it's likely a printer issue. If you are seeing gradations with steps on screen (rather than in print) it could be your display screen profile and calibration that’s causing the issue.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |