The Universal Photographic Digital Imaging Guidelines

[gooseberry]

Thought this might be useful

http://www.updig.org/guidelines/index.php

Quote from the site:

These 12 guidelines — provided as a Quick Guide plus an in-depth Complete Guide — aim to clarify the issues affecting accurate reproduction and management of digital image files. Although they largely reflect a photographer's perspective, anyone working with digital images should find them useful. The guidelines have three primary goals:

* Digital images should look the same as they transfer between devices, platforms and vendors.
* Digital images should be prepared in the correct resolution, at the correct size, for the device(s) on which they will be viewed or printed.
* Digital images should have metadata embedded that conforms to the IPTC standards, thereby making the images searchable, providing usage and contact information, and stating their creators or copyright owners.

Table of Contents

A. Quick Guide
The executive summary

1. Color Management
Using and embedding ICC color profiles

2. Monitor Calibration
Hardware calibration and profiling; monitor soft-proofing

3. Color Spaces
Camera settings; image editing; offset printing; CMYK conversions; photo lab prints

4. File Formats
Camera RAW; DNG; formats for the web; formats for print

5. Naming Files
Cross platform compatibility; avoiding duplicate file names

6. Resolution
How to describe; optimizing for the screen; for inkjet prints; for continuous-tone printing; for offset printing

7. Sharpening
Capture sharpening; process sharpening; sharpening tools; dealing with noise; output sharpening

8. Metadata
IPTC Creator and Copyright; keywords; the importance of metadata

9. File Delivery
Media; methods; file info; ReadMe files

10. Guide Prints and Proofs
Print and proof viewing

11. Archiving
Who; what; where

12. Workflow
Matching to needs; what it should do; choosing the right tools

[Greg B]

Very interesting, thanks. The downloadable pdf is worth a read.

[Yi-P]

Great read, thanks for sharing

[Glen]

Gooseberry, how dissapointing, something useful, by the name I thought it was a link to energypolice's site


.

[MCWB]

Awesome Glen!

[Nnnnsic]

Glen, I actually expected the same when I clicked the link for this thread.

[gooseberry]

Gooseberry, how dissapointing, something useful, by the name I thought it was a link to energypolice's site


.

Hahaha... yeah, I thought the title was a bit poncy, but that's the way they named it. Had to read energypolice's thread again for another good laugh...