Ray,
Like many inquisitive minds on this List, I long got a copy of the PDF
detailing Bill Atkinson's journey into "Within the stone". But thank's for
posting a fresh link to it in your reply :-)
I'd just like to make two quick points, here, with respect to Mr. Atkinson's
printing success or any other color management success stories :
repeatability and predictability.
First, repeatability.
Is there such thing as repeatability on an offset printing press? Just how
repeatable is a brand spanking new Heidelberg Speedmaster or Man Roland
compared to a 10 year Heidelberg Speedmaster or 10 year old Komori? Day to
day? 365 days a year? From one pressmen to another?
My point is that there are a slew of factors that are concuring to break a
given press stability down, in spite of the best willingness in the world to
keep it stable. Paper, ink, and, gosh, even plates. All these do vary to
some extent.
I don't mean to say that we should not strive for repeatability in the
pressroom, far from it, but it does not come free. So much so that many
print shops are not willing to pay the price because, frankly, many
customers have such a wide range of acceptability that many printers don't
see the added benefits of building higher quality levels into their process.
This is not science fiction, folks.
So where is the driving force coming in North America for building the kinds
of high-end quality levels that Mr. Atkinson found in Japan? It's not enough
to set specifications in print, like GRACoL or SWOP or ISO-12647-x: the
corresponding value system needs to come along as well. It seems to me that,
in Japan (since we're talking about the case of Japan but the same could be
said for other parts of the world), individuals are all dedicated to the
cause of their employer. In contrast, in North America, a lot of folks are
after their own well-being. So, unless some cultural change comes about, to
reconcile the employee's goals with the corporation goaks, in the long run,
people like Mr. Atkinson will always flock offshore to satisfy their
printing dreams.
Second, suppose we have repeatability in the process. The fact of the matter
is that this does not necessarily translate into predictability! Here, there
are again many factors consuring against attaining the level of color
matching we all would like to see delivered by the promises of color
management. Be it in offset printing, inkjet printing or what have you.
Variations in instruments designs and performance (DTP70 vs Spectroscan, for
example), variations in lighting technology (GTI vs Just vs Phillips) -- we
still do not have an internationnally agreed upon D50 simulator today --,
are all working against attaining the level of quality we would like.
As an example, I've seen press sheets to proofs matches that were really
questionnable under one set of excellent tubes, under a given press viewing
console, but that surprised me in a positive sense under another brand of
tubes.
In the end, to make the whole process work takes a lot of dedication and
hard work on the part of everyone involved. Yes, I agree no one should have
to touch the press dials, job after job. And all plates should be within a
1% variation and designers should be freed to create whathever they want.
But a lot of shops still don't share basic calibration techniques, today:
not all presses are calibrated to the G7 method as of this writing and a
large share are still stuck in TVI land, with little foreseable change in a
close future. Alas, that's not science fiction.
And even though all kinds of press control systems are now contributing
today to press repeatability (close-loop or image control), what people
consider acceptable is still very wide. Some industries like packaging live
in very high quality levels -- and are willing to pay a premium for it. But
that's not the bulk of printing.
Yes, Marco, that is the main idea. Let me state it with more detail.
It is not a question of producing "pleasing color', but rather, being
able to produce consistent color. Whether or not it is "accurate color"
or "pleasing color" should be up to the person producing the files. It
should not be up to the press room.
I mean that a well trained graphic artist or photographer can control
the color that they wish on the final printed piece by knowing how to
specify and tolerance the files that they send to the printer. The
maker of the files will know what the printer can do by receiving the
ICC profile of the press, ink, and paper that was chosen. The printer
is expected to print to a standard specified by the ICC profile of their
press when it is set to its optimized condition to print the maximum
gamut that can be reproduced consistently. It should be up to the
graphic artist or photographer to decide what colors they wish to
reproduce that are within the gamut of the press. The pre-press group
should produce consistent plates. The press room should run the press
by the numbers and produce a consistent and predictable product. This
also requires process control for the inks and paper as well.
If you would like to see how the "Within the Stone" was produced please
download this pdf:
http://homepage.mac.com/WebObjects/FileSharing.woa/wa/Making_Within_the_Stone.
pdf.pdf-zip.zip?a=downloadFile&user=billatkinson&path=/Public/Presentations/Ma
king Within the Stone.pdf
If you want more details, you will have to purchase the LLJV #16 from
the Luminous-Landscape web site.
Bill worked with Vanfu of Japan to produce this book. He went to three
North American printers before going to Japan. None of these printers
wanted to adopt Bill's methods. Vanfu believes that after working with
Bill they are printing to a much higher standard at less cost.
Ray Maxwell
Roger Breton