• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: TR001 and GRACol
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TR001 and GRACol


  • Subject: Re: TR001 and GRACol
  • From: Ray Maxwell <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:25:00 -0800

Hi Marco,

You have hit on one of my pet peeves... All ISO standards that I have read state an aiming point and a tolerance in units that can be measured by an objective instrument that measures in units traceable to a National or International standard.

When SWOP certifies a proofing process to be SWOP certified, they bring in three people form the industry and ask them if the candidate proof "matches" there master press sheets.  How close is close enough.  It is kind of like some peoples definition of pornography "I know it when I see it."

It is still art and craft...It is not a manufacturing process.

As spectrophotometers get cheaper and now that there is some hope that Graytag and X-Rite instruments many give the same readings we may make some progress in this area.

Ray


Marco Ugolini wrote:
In a message dated 3/13/06 12:44 AM, Ray Maxwell wrote:

  
Hi Faro,

TR001 is not a standard.  It is a report giving colormeteric (CIELAB)
data taken from an early run that was sactioned by the SWOP
organization.  SWOP is not a standard as well.  It is just a document
that suggest "best practices".  SWOP is for the publications printing
business.

GRACOL is a "best practices" document for the commercial printing
business.  They are still working on establishing a colormetric report
like TR001.  The last time I heard anything about there press runs, they
planned to call it TR004.

SNAP is a "best practices" document for the newpaper printing industy.

SNAP, GRACOL, and SWOP.  No, this is not a joke.
    


Hi Ray.

This is informative and good to keep in mind, but "best practices" is a bit
of a mouthful, and "suggestions" doesn't sound much better, unfortunately.
Seems to me that people can be forgiven if they refer to these "suggestions"
as "standards" instead, since they do seem to function as standards of sorts
in the absence of any clearly established ones. "SWOP-Certified", for
example, may be debatable as a concept from a strictly-defined viewpoint,
but it does help many people understand each other's needs a little better,
for the time being.

I'm all for precision, but sometimes one can tolerate a bit of "loose talk",
so to speak, for the sake of being practical, don't you think?

Regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA



  
 _______________________________________________
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

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: TR001 and GRACol
      • From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: TR001 and GRACol (From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: extracting embedded profiles
  • Next by Date: RE: extracting embedded profiles
  • Previous by thread: Re: TR001 and GRACol
  • Next by thread: Re: TR001 and GRACol
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread