November 2014 - colorsync-users

Softproof puzzle
by Peter Miles 01 Dec '14

01 Dec '14

Hi List members I don't understand something I have been seeing when soft proofing our staffs black and white images. When printing on hahnemuhle PhotoRag 308 paper on our Epson9900 printer I use a custom profile to soft-proof the image before printing. The PhotoRag 308 paper profile is a CMYK profile and built in i1Profiler. I use a colorburst RIP. I have noticed that the soft-proof of our staffs B&W images show posterizing in the deep shadows, when the images they supply are in the Adobe RGB1998 colorspace. But the same image, in Gray Gamma 2.2 space does not soft-proof with the posterizing in the shadows. My understanding is that the gray axis of Adobe RGB1998 IS gray gamma 2.2. So why the difference in the soft proof when the a source file is Adobe RGB1998 vs Gray Gamma 2.2? NOTE: When I use Photoshop to actually convert the RGB versions of the image to "hahnemuhle PhotoRag 308" CMYK color space, there is no posterizing visible in the shadows of the converted file. So it just appears to be a soft proofing thing, but only with 'RGB' colorspace versions of the B&W images. Your help with clarifying why this happens would be appreciated. Thanks Peter Miles

5 6

proofing yet again
by Mike Stewart 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

We are a pre-press shop and do all of our proofing on an HP Indigo press. We work with many, many printers worldwide and these printers usually supply us with the actual printing stock. If the paper is coated and fits the descriptor of a #1 or #2 sheet we will proof to either the GRACoL or Fogra39 printing condition depending on what the printer specifies. We use ORIS Color Tuner for the color management of the files being proofed. Now with all the optical brighteners printers seem to be doing their own thing and there is no real workflow. It is a crapshoot out there. Especially with uncoated stock (and now coated stocks) being high in OBA content; hardly any papers fall within tolerances for any current print condition. Example: If a printer sets up their colour to Fogra47 on the actual printing stock that is not within the Fogra47 specification (because of paper white with high OBAs) what can we do as suppliers? Do we have to follow suit and set up on the paper as well? Does this not throw us out of tolerance to Fogra47 (because paper white will fail)? This scenerio seems to be happening more and more. We get proofs (mostly inkjet proofs) from the printer saying that their proofs do not match our proofs. We never receive any information as to how these inkjet printer proofs were made and it remains up to us to try and figure things out. I'm guessing that all printer colour set ups are done right on the printing paper - some sort of data set is generated, then an ICC profile is made and used for the inkjet proofs. None of this is communicated to us and not too many proofs come complete with colour bars for us to measure - frustrating to say the least. We set up our proofing on papers that are within the print specification (Fogra39 and Fogra47, for example). If the printer supplied paper falls within that specification we never have a problem. Papers outside of the specifications are a problem. We use the print target closest to the paper white of the printer supplied stock and allow the colour to fall where it may. Should we (as proof providers) have sets ups for every paper type even though we proof on the actual paper? How can we say that a proof meets the Fogra47 specification when the paper it is printed on does not meet the specification? What info should we supply to the printers and them to us - and other questions? * 2/10 degrees * D50, Status T, etc. * Spectrophotometer manufacturer and revision number * Measurement backing * If lots of OBAs - should we used M0, M1 or M2 (not everyone can use M1 yet) * Why would a printer use M2 with papers containing OBAs * Do we create an ICC profile for out of spec papers? Thanks - Mike Stewart

2 1

Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 151
by Barry Gorrell 08 Nov '14

08 Nov '14

Hello Mark, Our staff color manages all the displays in digital imaging lab at a local community college. Before the Monaco-Gretag-Xrite consolidation we did that with a couple of MonacoOPTIXs from Monaco Systems. These days we use Xrite Display1 Pros and are very happy with the results. We also have a ColorMunki which does pretty well at a lower cost. For a variety of reasons we've not been as happy with Datacolor solutions. Having said all that I understand that many folks prefer both the ColorEyes and Basicolor Display solutions over most of the other products on the market. We've not used either product, but would be curious to hear from other colorsync listers who have. Barry Gorrell Lab Coordinator VCP Lab - Cecil College ________________________________________________________________ On Nov 6, 2014, at 3:00 PM, colorsync-users-request(a)lists.apple.com wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Monitor calibration software/hardware for Mac/PC > (mfranzen3(a)wi.rr.com) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 15:36:04 -0500 > From: mfranzen3(a)wi.rr.com > To: colorsync-users(a)lists.apple.com > Subject: Monitor calibration software/hardware for Mac/PC > Message-ID: <20141105203604.21V0X.116154.root@cdptpa-web27> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Hello all - > > Someone just asked me what would be a good (maybe not the BE$T) monitor calibration software that is compatible with Mac and PC. I have not had to calibrate a PC for quite a few years and I use an Eizo self-calibrating monitor with my Mac, so I may be out of the loop a bit as to what is the latest/greatest. > > This isn't for highly critical color matching, just to get an iMac and a laptop to reasonably display an expected output. > > I would appreciate opinions of any variety (I know, I came to the right place!). > > Thanks, > > Mark Franzen > mfranzen3(a)wi.rr.com > > > ------------------------------

1 0

RE: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 151
by Paul Sherfield 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

1 0

Re: Monitor calibration software/hardware for Mac/PC
by tlabarbera 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

>>mfranzen3(a)wi.rr.com: This isn't for highly critical color matching, just to get an iMac and a laptop to reasonably display an expected output. I'm pc-based and have always used a Datacolor Spyder (in various incarnations) for calibrating my monitors over the years--from my NEC CRT to NEC LCD2090Uxi to my current Asus PA248Q--and been pleased with the Spyder. My current is the Spyder3Elite and also did some beta testing a few years ago on their entry level SypderXpress line if you are looking for the less expensive approach. Terrie tlbtlb(a)mail.com

1 0

Monitor calibration software/hardware for Mac/PC
by mfranzen3＠wi.rr.com 05 Nov '14

05 Nov '14

Hello all - Someone just asked me what would be a good (maybe not the BE$T) monitor calibration software that is compatible with Mac and PC. I have not had to calibrate a PC for quite a few years and I use an Eizo self-calibrating monitor with my Mac, so I may be out of the loop a bit as to what is the latest/greatest. This isn't for highly critical color matching, just to get an iMac and a laptop to reasonably display an expected output. I would appreciate opinions of any variety (I know, I came to the right place!). Thanks, Mark Franzen mfranzen3(a)wi.rr.com

1 0