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

Altering your image with the clone stamp was inexcusable and resulted
in information being corrupted.  Altering your image to CMYK was to
be expected - this is the format demanded by print publishers.
The journals I deal with have carefully outlined the requirements for
submission of images, color and BW alike.  Color images are required
to be CMYK and TIFF format.  If the submitter can't provide those,
then the journal manager must make a decision: convert the image or
to eliminate it.  Since color images are frequently a profit point
(the submitter frequently pays exorbitant costs to have them
published), the image is almost never eliminated.  However, because
you are paying for the privilege of publishing in color, you should
demand the opportunity to proof your images before publication, just
as is the case for commercial work.  This would provide an
opportunity to correct any problems prior to the press run, even to
the extent of color correction ("it looks too red...").  All journals
I have worked with have been very accommodating in that regard.
Rob Palmer

>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


--
Robert J. Palmer Jr., Ph.D.
Natl Inst Dental Craniofacial Res - Natl Insts Health
Oral Infection and Immunity Branch
Bldg 30, Room 310
30 Convent Drive
Bethesda MD 20892
ph 301-594-0025
fax 301-402-0396