Re: Approval and ICC
Re: Approval and ICC
- Subject: Re: Approval and ICC
- From: "joe borne" <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:45:16 -0500
>
Message: 2
>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:23:36 -0600
>
From: Jim Mitchell <email@hidden>
>
Reply-To: email@hidden
>
Organization: The Richards Group
>
To: email@hidden
>
Subject: Re: Approval and ICC
>
>
Joe Borne wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Kodak Approval was designed with one purpose in mind - to create a
>
> digital proof that was a legitimate replacement for analog film proofing.
>
> The Approval creates a faithful dot-for-dot representation of exactly how
>
> the job will plot on film. When this device is employed it's primary purpose
>
> is to allow technicians and savvy clients to actually look at dot structure,
>
> screening, rotation, rosette and density. If you apply a profile, no matter
>
> how perfect it is, it will invalidate the entire reason for using the
>
> Approval in the first place.
>
>
So Joe, your saying that good color or match color is a function of dot
structure,
>
screening, rotation, rosette and density. Interesting I thought matching color
was
>
about matching color. Approval is a great machine but because of the different
>
colorants used in proofing systems and printing systems, using an ICC profile
is
>
the best tool available for achieving the holy grail of match color.
No, not at all. I am not trying to state that the Kodak "old world" color
matching method is better in any way. Personally I would like to not see the
Approval in use at all. I am simply trying to warn those who have the
device, and who have clients that grown used to checking the dot structure
etc.. on it. If you introduce a profile to this workflow, you can cause a
great deal of confusion to your clients (and pain for yourself).
I agree that profiling the device probably would produce better color. But I
am sure that the profile for the Approval would not match the profile for
the imagesetter or platemaker. As a result, the dot structures would change,
and if something goes wrong at the press, the client is going to pull out
that Approval and hang you up by the short hairs because your plates do not
match it. In the world of offset, this isn't as big a deal. But start mixing
in gravure and flexo work, and dot isn't just a factor, its the ONLY factor.
The dot limits on gravure and flexo are one of the most critical factors in
the job.
>
>
>
>
> A profile by nature disregards percentage data in favor of a remix of colors
>
> that give a better visual representation. A profile will adjust the
>
> percentages of color in each channel individually in order to achieve better
>
> visual representation of a Lab value. If clients are given an Approval proof
>
> that has had a profile applied overtop of it, they are being given a false
>
> proof.
>
>
This is why pressmen take hours to match a proof that even though the dot
gains and
>
density match they can't hit. Printers match to color, if they had a better
proof
>
that was a better visual match they would spend less time on make ready.
Saving the
>
customer more money. I'll take a false proof that has a better visual match
than an
>
accurate dot and density proof that doesn't match any day.
I would as well, you simply missed my point. I would rather not see the
Approval in use either. But the reality is that many clients are used to
seeing analog proofs and checking dot. If you start mixing percentage dot
proofs with ICC, you are asking for trouble. It is better to convert the
client over to using a non dot percentage proof like an Epson.
If you are going to buy an Approval and use profiles on it, save yourself
tens of thousands of dollars and buy an Epson 9x00 series printer instead.
Use the Mach1 RIP and hit more colors better that the Approval can.
>
>
> The dots on the page will not be anywhere close to what will happen
>
> to that data on film or plate.
>
>
In a few years most of us won't care about dots, well be going for a visual
match.
>
As ink jet gets better you'll see more Iris and Dupont ink jet proofs at press
side
>
as you do now.
>
>
Now I do agree with Joe that every effort should be used to get as close as
>
possible by using density and dot gain. But when you have gone as far as you
can
>
with dot, use a Black Channel preserving device link profile and I'm sure
you'll be
>
impressed and your customers delighted, I know mine are.
I am glad you are having success in this workflow. I am sure though that
your clients are not dot percentage fanatics. Here in the Cincinnati area
we have a 200 year old printing industry and the clients to go with it. As a
result I am constantly up against the old world dot structure mentality. I
am speaking from experience when I say that these types of clients will go
bezerk when they find dots on plate that bear no relation to the "dot proof"
you showed them.
--
Joe Borne
Color & Graphic Technology Consultant
(859) 282-0393
-- "The worst thing to do is nothing" --