Re: Asian printing (was: rgb to cmyk conversions)
Re: Asian printing (was: rgb to cmyk conversions)
- Subject: Re: Asian printing (was: rgb to cmyk conversions)
- From: Busher Jr Richard C <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:52:05 -0800
A few simple observations based on personal knowledge, if I may.
The reasons why anyone in the US prints in Asia, or in Europe, are cost
and value. Quite simply, printing costs less in Asia and throughout
much of Europe, although European prices are not as low as they once
were, compared to the dollar. The printing quality can be excellent in
both regions, and the combination of low cost and high quality equals
value.
Speaking specifically of Asia, where I have some experience, there are
two main drawbacks to working there as opposed to working in the US or
Canada.
The first drawback is time. Sending files to them and receiving proofs
from them takes longer, adding to the time line of the project. On top
of that, shipping the finished product can add as much as a month to
delivery time. There is also the language barrier and that factors into
the time equation. They may speak English but they don't usually think
American. There is also the time and expense to travel there for a
press check.
The second drawback is color management if you are supplying color
files. There are an increasing number of printers in Asia who know
something about color management, but not many based on my somewhat
limited research. Some will be able to handle rgb to cmyk conversions,
but not many. I would recommend sending cmyk, but that assumes that you
know how to create cmyk, a totally separate issue. If at all possible
you must communicate directly with the prepress department of the
printing company to establish a workflow. Keep in mind my comment
regarding thought vs. language above.
The third issue is profiles. Can the printer supply you with profiles
for their presses or proofing system? Can you make profiles from
targets run through their proofing system? Are you aware that a profile
intended for a #1 coated sheet is not the same a a profile for a #2
uncoated sheet? That a monochromatic image should have a stronger black
plate than a colorful image? That one printer might be able to handle a
TAC of 380% and another might not be able to handle that much ink?
If you want "quality" these are all issues of importance. I know that
all photographers are obsessed with the quality question since I am one
(although I have morphed into a prepress provider) and most of my
clients are photographers.
Most Asian printers use "wet" proofs, or "press" proofs, and feel that
these are superior to digital proofs. The fact is that wet proofs are
notoriously unpredictable, inconsistent and unreliable, in my
experience. Sending cmyk files for proofing can result in a constant
circle of "tail chasing" color corrections if you don't own a spectro
or densitometer, and don't know what their "targets" are for density
and dot gain. You must insist that color bars are included on all
proofs (large enough for your spectro to read...e.g. the color bars on
a press sheet are too small for the eye-one to read), that enable you
to read dmax and dot gain. If the densities and dot gain are "out of
spec" then what you see is most definitely not what you will get if you
print to spec, i.e. print to predefined densities and dot gain on the
actual press run. You will then be forced to make compromises on press
to match the proofs, not something you want to do.
In my real word experience I have accepted proofs that were out of
spec. But I knew from measurements that they were out of spec and knew
that the files were OK and should print fine. I also knew that I would
die of old age before I would get a set of wet proofs that were within
specs. Without that knowledge I would have made unwarranted changes.
For example, an image that is too magenta but for which the controls
indicate a higher than normal magenta dmax and/or magenta dot gain
might be accepted. An image that appeared flat but had a black dmax of
1.7 instead of the anticipated 1.9 might be accepted. In my experience
I have been forced to use "Kentucky windage" and densitometry in order
to get on press. If I insisted on perfect proofs I would never have
gotten on press. Digital proofs are much more reliable, in my
experience. However you must still inspect each and every proof for
consistency. Once you have established numbers for dmax and dot gain
you should aim for + or - 2% repeatability, something that is a
reasonable expectation with digital proofs but unlikely with wet
proofs.
In summation, if you are comfortable and confident providing prepress
for a book to be printed in the US then you should have the skills
necessary to print in Asia. Just be prepared for a much longer process.
If you don't have prepress experience then I would caution you against
working in Asia for your first project.
Cheers,
Dick Busher
Cosgrove Editions
Prepress and Print Production
email@hidden
888-507-7375
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden