Re: UCR/GCR revisited
Re: UCR/GCR revisited
- Subject: Re: UCR/GCR revisited
- From: Terry Walker <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 07:53:49 -0400
Karl,
We are already doing that here, but we also have the luxury of
creating all our own projects in house, in RGB and converting to our
custom profile, which is a version of Gracol, except with MaxK. We
are getting the benefit of using less cmy ink and achieving gray
balance easier, I believe, because of it. I am now experimenting with
lowering the TAC because we're finding that with the MaxK, lowering
TAC doesn't lower K, it actually goes up slightly depending on how far
you go. I don't know if this will have a big benefit though as I
think it will only save additional ink in the very darkest shadows,
which usually aren't much coverage. The biggest benefit may be less
ink piling up, quicker drying, less chance of offset, but we pretty
much coat everything we do here, so that's not an issue for us, now,
if we do the occasional uncoated project it may be we could use it for
that.
I don't think that printing objects with different profiles should be
a problem at press either, if the press is running to a standard and
the proof is made to match that standard. The pressman runs
everything to that standard and the objects will take care of
themselves. It took a while for our pressman to realize that, and
we're trying to get the creatives to buy in, but old habits are hard
to break, we can show them that the proof is showing what the press
will print but its hard to get them to buy in completely to the notion
of make ALL your adjustments at proofing stage and the press will
print what you see. They still want to think that if it gets to press
and its a little too red or yellow or blue or something, they can
tweak it and make it what they want, not realizing that with the MaxK
GCR you can't really adjust the colors on press (which is the whole
point really) AND that if you do, you're throwing the gray balance off
somewhat somewhere. The benefit is more stable on press, repeatable
proofable result, no 2 hour color tweaking at press side only to find
out you ended up back exactly where it would have run to start with
according to the standard anyway, gray balanced!
Its hard here, and we are an in-plant basically, creating all our own
files ourselves, and I've had a hard time getting both sides
convinced, press and designers, can't imagine what its like out there
for a commercial shop, or a designer, or anyone wanting to implement
color management and meeting resistance! TRUST the system, trust the
proof, trust running to the numbers at press, it works.
The answer for us has been to design in RGB, then convert to cmyk PDF
when going to RIP out of Indesign, the designers just have to remember
to turn on Proof Colors to check their files and to trust the proof is
showing them what they'll get at press, and the pressman has to run to
the numbers and then gray balance.
Terry Walker
On Jun 10, 2008, at 4:59 AM, Koch Karl wrote:
Am 10.06.2008 um 00:05 schrieb Marco Ugolini:
But, on the other hand, using different black generation policies
for images
on a single signature may have the *positive* effect of preserving
the
integrity of images in that signature that we want to *protect*
against
possible color shifts on press, while allowing other less critical
ones to
shift as they may.
For example, if you have some images on an individual signature that
are in
full color and others that also use all 4 inks but are meant to look
neutral, you may want to separate the latter using a stronger black
generation (not "Max K" necessarily) to provide added protection
against
loss of neutrality, whereas the former can still be separated with a
lower
black component.
Hi Marco,
I agree with this, with one exception (again these exceptions):
The pressman needs to be aware of these mixed Light/Heavy K
(separated) images (to use Harolds wording, which definitely is more
correct than the UCR/GCR and especially UCA stuff). Light K images
will overly react on corrections in the color ink keys, while heavy K
images will overly react on corrections in the black ink keys.
Of course, all of the above concerns are superfluous (graem is right
here!), provided that – and only if! – the press works stable and
according to a (any) standard, the contract proof matches exactly this
standard, the press check is done under standard lighting – and the
customer is sensible enough to accept the result that looks like the
proof and doesn´t want last minute changes during the press run ;-)
Let me make it clear: I´m all against retouching on press!
But then, when all these provisions are being met, we won´t have to
bother about the black any more. Then we can use max black and save
ink. Colorful images remain colorful, even with max black, if the
profiler works correctly.
Regards,
Karl _______________________________________________
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
Terry Walker
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
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