Re: Issues related with the switch from FOGRA39/47 to FOGRA51/52
Re: Issues related with the switch from FOGRA39/47 to FOGRA51/52
- Subject: Re: Issues related with the switch from FOGRA39/47 to FOGRA51/52
- From: Martin Orpen <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 19:33:29 +0000
On 12 Feb 2019, at 01:11, Graeme Gill <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> As a profile making type person, my natural inclination would be to
> say "profile your press, and use that :-)", but it really comes down
> to what your intention is. If your intention is to run a press
> to FOGRA51 conditions so that customers can do separations
> using the standard FOGRA51 profile, then it seems you aren't
> currently hitting that mark with your press, or that your
> evaluation conditions differ markedly from the ones FOGRA51 uses,
> or that perhaps FOGRA51 press conditions are out of the range
> possible with your setup.
Graeme
Here’s an example of the problem:
Using any data sets prior to 51 and 52 it was possible to make ICC profiles
with different K generation and utilise them in prepress workflows them without
the printed results looking any different to those separate using the generic
profiles.
So a black & white image using a max K FOGRA39 profile will proof identically
to a standard conversion and print without grey balance issues.
You cannot do this with the 51 and 52 data.
If you build a profile in Argyll or i1Profiler from this data the results are
terrible.
There is no Yellow in the separations!
The only workaround with Argyll for high GCR separations in 52 is to first
convert using the ECI profile and then use a Device Link to generate the
desired K ramp.
There is no workaround with i1Profiler, it cannot produce an acceptable 52
profile.
Even the generic ECI 52 profile produces results that our clients aren’t
particularly happy with. The skin tone doesn’t have enough yellow.
So we tend to use GMG’s ColorServer variant which does boost the Y.
But, again, this causes more problems because it is easy to spot which images
have been separated by which profile. Which means we are no longer able to fix
problem images and then drop them seamlessly back into print workflows :(
It’s a mess.
--
Martin Orpen
Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
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