Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Dear Kathy,
Our practice has been to print a high quality image to our
satisfaction, using either a dye sublimation or an ink jet printer.
This print is either enclosed with the manuscript or mailed separately
to the editor, along with files converted to CMYK.  The publisher then
has a reference.  So far, most journals have generally done a good job
of matching our CMYK files to the reference print.  A complication in
conversions to CMYK is that publishers don't say which CMYK they use,
we we just get it close.  I was able to obtain from the Development
group some time ago that they regularly calibrate their monitors and
claim usually get the prints to match in 2 attempts.  I've found that
if someone insists that their green fluorescence appear yellowish green
to match what they see with a typical FITC filter, it is more difficult
to convert to CMYK than if they can accept a green shaded towards blue.
  As I know you are aware, users need to be alert to which RGB color
profile Adobe is using, certainly avoiding sRGB, when working with an
image prior to CMYK conversion.

Regards,
Glen
On Dec 21, 2004, at 3:25 PM, Kathy Spencer wrote:

> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
> Hello!
>        I have a question regarding publishing of color pictures, both
> on-line and
> in print...what has been your experience in getting what you wanted
> from
> various publishers?
>        One of my users just showed me an appalling use of the
> Photoshop clone
> stamp by the publisher to erase an arrow that they wanted in a
> different
> format. Several parts of the cell in this image were duplicated or
> triplicated...dendrites suddenly appeared where they were not in the
> original. Again, this was the publisher, not my user doing this. The
> issue
> was corrected, but we felt like they were trying to "pull one over on
> us".
>        In addition, we submitted an RGB version of the image
> electronically for
> their web page version, and asked them NOT to convert it to CMYK, as
> the
> gamut was distinctly less. They did it anyway. When this was pointed
> out,
> they tried to correct it, I'm assuming by converting again. Obviously,
> the
> re-re-converted image is not as preferred as the original we sent
> them. For
> the print version, all images were greyscale, to avoid the conversion
> issue.
>        Besides continuing to point out the inconsistencies and not
> accepting
> sub-standard publishing, what advice might you have to ensure proper
> color
> management? I do have my users proof their images by printer, not by
> monitor (subtractive vs. additive color). Most journals do not publish
> their ICC profiles, but should this be necessary for on-line
> publishing?
>        Hoping to provoke an interesting discussion. Thanks in advance.
>        Best wishes for a peaceful holiday season.
>        Kathy Spencer
>
>
> Kathy Spencer, Ph.D.
> Scientific Associate
> The Scripps Research Institute
> 10550 N. Torrey Pines Road
> ICND 202
> La Jolla, CA 92037
> 858-784-8437
>
Glen MacDonald
Core for Communication Research
Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center
Box 357923
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-7923  USA
(206) 616-4156
[log in to unmask]

************************************************************************
******
The box said "Requires Windows 95 or better", so I bought a Macintosh.
************************************************************************
******