Re: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
Re: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
- Subject: Re: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
- From: Mike Eddington <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:36:16 -0400
- Thread-topic: SWOP proofs grade 3 paper colour
> The point of picking a paper white color and sticking to it is that the color
of the paper is a huge factor in the overall appearance of images, so just going
to the color of the stock invalidates the concept of going to a known visual
specification. The proof becomes meaningless.
Not meaningless, just not necessarily or completely verifiable to the known
spec. In fact the proof can actually be more viually accurate. If paper IS a
huge factor in the overall appearance of images, that seems more like an
argument to match the color of the actual printing stock, despite the spec.
>Quote: Also while I lived in the US, proofing systems were always required by
their buyers to be "SWOP certified". But the first thing they then requested
were either a custom made profile or to turn this strong paper tint off "
Our experience as well. Clients often like to see a match to the paper
they¹ve chosen for their project. Hard to argue with that really. Turning
off the simulation is something I generaly disagree with, particularly if
the client just doesn¹t like to see dots in the non-image area through a
loupe. That will lead me into discussions of accuracy with them.
>?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.
>Sure, people have been cheating the system for years, and will continue to do
so, but that just moves away from accepted standards.
I think ³cheating² is not necessarily an appropriate word. At the recent G7
Summit I recall a question brought up from a printer who asked if he should
reject proofs he had been receiving from a third party that ³failed²
accepted tolerances for paper white point. The initial response from the
moderator and the majority of the crowd was ³absolutely². My point is that
1) paper isn¹t manufactured with any tolerance toward a SWOP or Gracol white
point and is not an uncommon occurrence to find paper outside the spec in
use , and 2) simulating a custom paper shade often leads to a better visual
match with the final product. Turns out that the printer in question was
referring to a Kodak Approval proof. I enquired what stock the proof
supplier was using for the Kodak Approval proof, and turns out it was the
actual stock to be used on press. So why would anyone reject that particular
proof based on white point...its the actual printing stock?
Nothing wrong with doing general proofing using the white point of SWOP3 (or
5 or Gracol 1), but our clients have always requested a closer white point
simulation of the actual paper in use ..for the fact that it does improve
the visual match between proof and press sheet. My advice would be to prove
that you can pass the ISO 12647-7 tolerances (or whatever the initial aim
is) across the board (many of the larger printers require a pre-evaulation
of proofng up front), then you (and your client and printer) can decide
whether to deviate from the spec to match a custom white point or not. In
the environment in which we work, its very difficult to be an all out
color-nazi.
³No Proof for you!²
Mike Eddington
_______________________________________________
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