Re: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
Re: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
- Subject: Re: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
- From: Mike Strickler <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 19:54:16 -0700
Fogra 39L (sheetfed) has a white point of 95 0 -2, the same as GRACoL
here. Yes, many do proof with relative colorimetric rendering (no
paper simulation), but that's because they find they cannot match the
reference white. It most often happens when the reference paper is
very bright and or bluish, as is very often the case. Unless the
proof paper is sufficiently bright and/or also somewhat bluish
absolute rendering will result in a too-dark print, as cyan and
magenta are added to the background to match the reference hue. Far
less difficulty is involved in matching warmer reference paper values
as mostly yellow is added, which has little effect on the L* value.
Best practice requires having a proofing paper brighter than the
reference if the hue is also different. Relative colorimetric is a
sensible choice when the proofing paper is already very close to the
reference color.
As for the difference between the SWOP3 standard and the actual paper
used in your publication, well, the SWOP3 reference is obviously not
the one to use. If you cannot find an "off-the-shelf" reference
profile that is close enough you might consider editing the white
point of a standard profile of the same type (e.g. coated web) to
match your press substrate.
Good luck,
Mike
Also, the Fogra 39L paper simulation is a bit lighter than this.
L*93.5 to be exact. But I have seen some GMG 39L proofs coming from
Repro houses with the paper tint turned off fully.
I just wondered with the US paper colour is so dark, and if it was
common practice (albeit wrong practice) to turn off the paper tint
sometimes.
Ken Fleisher wrote:
I have a feeling that what you are reacting to is a result of seeing
the
paper simulation against the inkless white border of the paper. Try
trimming
the proof to the edge of the paper simulation (so there is no pure
white
paper) and see if you still find it objectionable.
Yes, thanks Ken, that is a helpful comment and makes me realise that
maybe that is just the case...
Thanks, all
Graeme
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Colorsync-users mailing list
email@hidden
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
End of Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 152
***********************************************
_______________________________________________
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