The gamut warning itself is neither significant nor particularly accurate. The question is whether important detail is being lost.

Sure, it’s easy to produce colors in LAB that are impossible to achieve in print. When you do, either you’ll get something that’s as bright as you can hope for under the circumstances, or you’ll get that plus a loss of detail. If you do lose detail you may not care, depending on the image.

Instead of looking at the gamut warning, then, you should be looking at the brightest parts of the image as you convert it, trying to detect if you’re losing anything of value.

Chapter 7 of Photoshop LAB Color 2E shows a strong technique for getting the brightest possible colors in CMYK while retaining control of how much detail gets lost. It offers a shot of brightly colored motorcycles as the example.

Thanks very much! I joined the Color Theory Group. I’m not sure about working the 10 images, but for now I’ll follow the posts and see if the group is a good fit. thank you for telling me about it.
Bruce

Getting the book is commendable, however there’s another opportunity. With so many of us stuck at home, our discussion group just finished (this week) a series of ten case studies, one a week. Everybody gets the same image to work on, we get between 25 and 40 entries from all over the world, and then we compare and suggest improvements. Plan on spending up to an hour on your version and then 2-3 hours following the discussions and seeing what others have done. Good way to find out where you stand because some of the entries come from top professionals. If you do it, of course you’d want to avoid looking at anyone else’s work before you were finished.

The text messages are publicly viewable, including a thumbnail of the original, but to access the source files you have to join the group, which is painless. The instructions for the first of the ten, which is one of the easiest, are here, and you can get an idea of the others here. But if you want to put in the time, do the exercises in order.

There is indeed quite a lot of van Gogh in the book. Our headquarters is Atlanta, so that would be the city of publication, although in today’s world we don’t find the tradition of explicitly stating a publication city particularly useful.

Good luck with the thesis, it’s a difficult topic!

Silly question over here. I want to cite your foreword for the book in my Masters thesis on Van Gogh by I cannot find the city of edition to include it in the bibliographic reference. If you could provide me with that information, I would very much appreciate it.

Thank you in advance.

The resources are broken into three downloads for size reasons. Here are the links.
First download
Second download
Third download