Re: Standards-based inkjet proofing ABC
Re: Standards-based inkjet proofing ABC
- Subject: Re: Standards-based inkjet proofing ABC
- From: Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:07:26 +0100
And there are parts where my press profile is bigger than my proofer!
In phase one the problem was to help users coming from non-ICC
Photoshop and Quark backgrounds to understand which ICC conversion
would produce a proof (: three years ago), in phase two the problem
was to help them plot their profiles into a gamut comparison tool (:
two years ago), and now in phase three the problem is to help users
understand that the fact that their inkjet profile has a larger gamut
than their output/simulations profile does not mean that the inkjet
gamut has been cropped to the surface of the output/simulations gamut
in the actual sheet that came out of the inkjet.
Now my press profile is fairly weak.
I assume you mean the profile of your printing condition has a small
gamut volume. And that your inkjet profile has an even smaller
volume. In this case you are ditched ... just as if you went to a
shop specialized in on-press proofs and asked to have a glossy offset
job proofed for newsprint.
We are using a 6 colour inkjet. Any ideas, anybody?
As I explained in the Inkjet profiling ABC in January, it is not a
question of the number of inks in your printer. Soluble inkjet dye
inks penetrate the paper, non-soluble pigment offset inks layer on
the paper. Therefore, the gamut volume of an inkjet system has a lot
to do with the paper.
First profile multiple ink / paper combinations for your inkjet and
use a gamut comparison tool to identify the combination with the
largest gamut volume (and the closest look-and-feel match to your
printing paper(s)). Do not use a 2D simulation tool, because you will
not see the real differences.
When you have determined which ink / paper combination to run, based
on which ink / paper profile has the gamut volume you want, you must
determine
a. that your inkjet lays down color consistently,
b. that your inkjet gamut is in fact cropped to the output /
simulations gamut in the inkjet sheet you are holding.
Use the ProfileMaker MeasureTool for (a). Use the FOGRA control strip
for (b) with a spot spectro like the Eye-One Pro or Spectrolino
because you cannot scan the FOGRA strip with the DTP41 due to the
special layout requirements of the instrument.
If your inkjet is not consistent, you cannot verify your proofs. The
small number of patches means that deviations in the way the inkjet
lays down ink will invalidate the proof causing wasted time and
effort. I do not know if the inkjet you have is consistent, or if it
will support ink / paper combinations with enough gamut volume to do
what you want. But finding out is simple ... all the tools are there
now and are much less specialized and complex than four or three
years ago.
If you do not measure the proof with a spectrophotometer, you do not
know that the proof is what you assume it is, that is, a cropped
gamut. If you do not have a consistent inkjet printer, you are not
going to be able to proof economically.
Hope this helps -:)