RE: Changing inks
RE: Changing inks
- Subject: RE: Changing inks
- From: "Mike Eddington" <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 10:58:43 -0500
- Thread-topic: Changing inks
Well, it's not something I would want to do...not only matching solids,
but overprints as well to a proofer. Would you be deviating from ISO
2846-1 compliant inks? I personally don't see the importance of keeping
a "dot" proofer for the sake of the dot structure on the proof, which is
often a simulation anyway. Seems like it would be much simpler to match
the proofer to the press and give up the dot worshipping aspect of
proofing for a more colorimetric match.
Michael Eddington
North American Color, Inc.
www.nac-mi.com
>>Hello,
>>
>>Just want to get opinions on something our company is doing.
>>
>>We have two proofers, an epson 10600uc and a Fuji Final Proof.
Currently
>>the
>>hues of inks that we use on press do not match the ink sheets on the
final
>>proof. The final proof is a "dot proofer."
>>
>>We want to keep the final proof and use it as a dot proof, we don't
want
>>to
>>contaminate dots or use Device link profiles to manage color. If a job
has
>>a
>>color that is 50% cyan and 40% magenta, that is what we want to see on
the
>>Final Proof plus dotgain considerations.
>>
>>We are running press tests with different ink manufacturers to see
which
>>of
>>their inks match the final proof the best. If pricing, quality and
>>runabilty
>>is the same or better then we will use the ink that best matches the
final
>>proof.
>>
>>Any thoughts.
>>---------------------------------------
>>Patrick Donigain
>>Imaging Manager
>>The Marek Group, Inc
>>W228 N821 Westmound Drive
>>Waukesha, WI 53186
_______________________________________________
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