Re: press or proofer
Re: press or proofer
- Subject: Re: press or proofer
- From: Peter Kleinheider <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 20:14:20 +0200
- Resent-date: Thu, 20 May 2004 20:52:25 +0200
- Resent-from: Peter Kleinheider <email@hidden>
- Resent-message-id: <email@hidden>
- Resent-to: email@hidden
Hi Xabier
I absolutely agree. We also have some print products that are outside
the standard. We used to make profiles for that - done with a big
effort - and are also facing the press instabilities.
What we found that mostly the dotgains were varying. So the operater
started to turn the knobs for the maximum ink densities which on the
other hand changed our Lab aim values of the ink solids.
If we know find out that the machine is printing with higher/lower
dotgains than the aim values (which we had when generating the profile)
we make plates that compensate this behaviour. On every print we have
small patches where the "behavior" of our machine gets visualize so we
know how we have to generate our plates.
This sound like a lot of work, but it is much easier than expected.
This only works since we linearize our platesetter ourself and didn't
let the instructors of the supplier do it. We found out that it is the
complete wrong way to to enter aim-values in the printer gradiation
tool for every 5 percent (at least on our system). We usually only
change the 40 and 80 % value depending on the measured dotgain values
of our press.
Peter
Am 20.05.2004 um 09:59 schrieb Xabier Urien:
Hi to all....
Let me explain my experience.....
We've got pre-press and press, even photographic studio... we works
with CTP
(since 7 years ago) and in theory is a perfect place to have a
colorworkflow... (from our digital capture to our press, proofs
includes)
but....
I agree that ISO can be helpfully in some cases... but I think that
depending of your type of production, you might like print with higher
densities or for instance with more Yellow... (for example, our
speciality
are furniture, and we print with more yellow than standard...)
I mean that an ISO normative, should to be a starting point, not the
target....
Following this theory, the answer it seems easy... make the Icc of your
press and match your proofs to that ...
But one of the biggest problems is the instability of the Press....
Unfortunately there are to many things that influence in the color
answer
and dot gain of the press....
We have made a BIG effort trying to match our proofs to our press...
but
there are to many variables on press (only with papers is an
underworld) ...
Solution... say one's prayers.. ;o)
For a moment we haven't found a "perfect" solution, but we are working
with
acceptable result as below..
Our proofs are stable, then we tray to match the press to our
proofs... but
we have "cut" the color answer of our proofs, trying to facilitate our
press...
I know that is not the best way, but for a moment works (more or
less)...
cheers...
Xabier Urien
www.otzarreta.com
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.