Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 80
Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 80
- Subject: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 80
- From: Andreas Kraushaar <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 08:08:31 +0200
Follow us on Twitter:
English channel: https://twitter.com/fogra_org <https://twitter.com/fogra_org>
Deutscher Kanal: https://twitter.com/fogra_de <https://twitter.com/fogra_de>
Dr.-Ing. Andreas Kraushaar
Dept. Prepress
Fogra Graphic Technology Research Association
Streitfeldstrasse 19
81673 Munich, Germany
Telefon: +49 89. 431 82 - 335
Telefax: +49 89. 431 82 - 100
E-mail: email@hidden <mailto:email@hidden>
Internet: www.fogra.org <http://www.fogra.org/>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not an addressee or otherwise authorized to receive this message,
you should not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this e-mail
or any information contained in the message. If you have received this
material in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
delete this message.
Managing Director: Dr. Eduard Neufeld | Registered Office: Munich | Register
of Associations: VR 4909
> On 06 Jul 2015, at 16:15, Mike Stewart <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Jan-Peter: Thanks for the reply. We usually receive stock from the printer
> themselves and as such we don't have much or any say in the stock used for
> final printing. As you say, with uncoated stocks high in OBA's; not too
> many stocks actually fit within ISO specifications for either coated or
> uncoated. We proof on the actual stock using an Indigo press. Since the
> inks used on the Indigo do not match the colourants of ISO specified
> printing inks; we must use colour management to simulate the outcome on
> these out of spec. papers.
>
> Seems like the Idealliance is going the route of substrate calculated data;
> and it looks to me like Fogra is still possibly going the individual ICC
> profile route. I may be wrong; but that is my perception. I have followed
> the Fred15 Project from its inception and actually have made use of the
> Fogra52 profile where and when paper stocks fall within the Fogra52 numbers.
let me chime in and try to clarify:
Separating between data preparation (creatives prepare data more or less ok for a (more or less) given printing condition) and actual printing (consuming data and printing the expected) we see it this way:
a) for offset printing there the new printing conditions (PC1 to PC8 defined in 12647-2:2013) and we strongly recommend to use them. As of FOGRA51 any dataset will ne M1 and depending on the relevance further printing conditions will follow. Printing conditions that happen to not being covered by 12647-2 require to establish a separate printing condition (and then the principles of 12647-2 will apply in the same way).
b) for digital printing we recommend (please read our free of charge PSD handbook) to use exchange spaces (maximum 3 to keep it easy: coated (F39 later F51), uncoated (F52) and we are working on F53 a large gamut candidate). Printing the expected means then for the print service provider to retarget this data to the actual printing condition. And here we provide a colour framework starting with rigorous side-by-side comparison (with 3 levels of visual closeness: A, B and C). Then we introduced media relative colour evaluation in 2010 (also with three levels A,B and C). With that we think to cover a lot of use cases in an objective and foreseeable (=standardized) way. Again keep in mind, that the print buyer just sees three exchange spaces and no calculated data sets and so forth!
Does this clarifies your point?
regards
Andy
>
> If we use Fogra52 to manage colour on stocks that fit within its tolerances
> and print a colour bar on each proof - what do I tell the printer what
> specification I have printed to and how do I prove it via the colour bar on
> each proof?
>
> I don't believe that Fogra52 has actually been officially released; but it
> does work quite well for those papers falling within its tolerances. i have
> a database of over 130 uncoated stocks we are currently proofing on for
> Asian, European and North American printers we currently deal with. The
> paper white of these stocks varies. Some will fit within Fogra47 and others
> within Fogra52. Most are somewhere in between - what do I do with those?
Any industry will get the standard it earns!
So if a printing condition is so important to a market place, please contribute to the standards body (nationally and also internationally). The work behind a characterisation data set is quite a lot. And we (nor ECI) is getting paid for this. We do this for the industry (from our point of view representing the interest of our members).
> That's where the substrate calculator comes in handy; but obviously I end
> up creating a new dataset and from there a new profile (if needed).
explain this to a print buyer or a designer in Photoshop which profile (build from a newly created data set) to pick …
> How do
> I tell a printer my proofs are somewhere between Fogra47 and 52 and they
> shouldn't have any problems matching on press. I would have to send them
> the dataset (or newly made profile).
>
> Thanks - Mike Stewart
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 2:00 PM, <email@hidden>
> wrote:
>
>> Send Colorsync-users mailing list submissions to
>> email@hidden
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> email@hidden
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> email@hidden
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Colorsync-users digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: dealing with printers (Jan-Peter Homann)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 12:46:22 +0200
>> From: Jan-Peter Homann <email@hidden>
>> To: email@hidden
>> Subject: Re: dealing with printers
>> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>>
>> Hello Mike,
>> You raise some interesting questions. From my personal point of view, a
>> workflow with substrate calculated data is currently fine for a inhouse
>> workflow, with proofing and printing in the same company or with a very
>> close cooperation between prepress provider and printer.
>> It does currently not fit the blind exchange of data and proofs based on
>> international standards (ISO) or international specifications (GRACoL,
>> PSO etc... )
>>
>> ESpecially in the uncoated area, we have the case, that current
>> standards and specs are not addressing papers with a lot of optical
>> brighteners.
>> Instititutions like e.g. FOGRA / ECI are working intensive on this issue
>> and I guess also Idealliance.
>>
>> See e.g. http://www.eci.org/en/projects/fred15 scrool down and have a
>> look at FOGRA52 data
>>
>> Regards
>> Jan-Peter
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 17.06.2015 um 19:19 schrieb Mike Stewart:
>>> Now that we are moving to Substrate Calculated Data sets based on paper
>>> white; how on earth do we communicate this to printers. Before OBA's we
>> had
>>> GRACoL, Fogra47 - just to name a few. We would colour manage our proofs
>> to
>>> GRACoL or Fogra47 (or some print specification), place an Idealliance
>>> colour bar on each proof and the customer/printer could measure the
>> colour
>>> bar to see if we were in compliance or not to the particular
>> specification.
>>>
>>> Now we start from GRACoL Uncoated 2013, change the Paper White values,
>>> create a new Data Set and proof to the new data set. Our colour bar on
>> each
>>> proof now becomes useless as it will never match to the original GRACoL
>>> Uncoated 2013. How do we communicate this to a printer in Asia. How can
>>> they now trust our proofs. Do we give them a small single row Press Type
>>> Colour Bar that prints within the job itself and also give the printer
>> the
>>> specs. for that colour bar. If so, what are the specs. of that colour bar
>>> (C,M,Y,K,R,G,B, grey balance swatches, etc). Data for that file would
>> have
>>> to be colorimetric and not solid ink and dot gain values I'm guessing.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Mike Stewart
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> --
>> Homann colormanagement tel: +49 30 611 075 18
>> Jan-Peter Homann mob: +49 171 54 70 358
>> Herzbergstr. 55 www.colormanagement.de
>> 10365 Berlin mailto:email@hidden
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: homann.vcf
>> Type: text/x-vcard
>> Size: 264 bytes
>> Desc: not available
>> URL: <
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/private/colorsync-users/attachments/20150703/5e1729a0/attachment-0001.vcf
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Colorsync-users mailing list
>> email@hidden
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
>>
>> End of Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 80
>> ***********************************************
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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