I am new here. Hi all of you!
Here is my first contribution; a question regarding:
Total Ink Coverage, TIC, for offset printing and the ink limits:
In the past, when I worked in a analogue photographic enlarger, the TIC was not open for discussions: we could not alter it.
When we bought a drum-scanner and where able to handle the values (and not colours, by the way) electronically we where now able to decide what TIC we wanted.
The TIC's used where based on what people from Crosfield, Hell etc told us was "good".
For coated offset printing values around 375% where often used. Same for uncoated and even for newsprint sometimes (at least in my company) until we learned more, usually from other people in the biz, and then we lowered the values for uncoated qualities.
Conclusion so far: TIC's where based on opinions and experience.
Photoshop and other softwares where introduced and followed the pattern as with the drum-scanners.
ICC-technology appeared. Good ideas but not very high quality until maybe five years back in history, generally speaking.
Initially the ICC-technology created more "colour gurus" rather then good quality.
TIC's still based on opinions, "gray hair" and "experience".
Some people in the biz started to alter values for TIC, often based on test-strips with CMYK, from 400% and down: visual checks etc.
Now:
For several years we have had the technology to actually calculate the best possible TIC in a scientifical manner but still many colour gurus use the "good old default" values. For example: 300 to 350 for coated, 260 to 319 (ECI) for uncoated and 220 to 240 for newsprint.
Why do we not calculate the TIC's scientifically? Today we have the tools, I have the tools and we use them.
One example: for coated offset printed within ISO standards we base a neutral black on around 340-350% and we reach L=10.
>From that we allow the calculation to deviate delta 1 in L, not in a or b. A engineer that I work with called this method JND, Just Noticeable Difference.
This way we reach a TIC in neutral black that is 233% (two hundred and thirty three)! In other words: we print neutral black with L=11 with 233%.
Note: This technology do not set the TIC limit to 233 for all colours, it is indvidual. A dark red can for example end up 244%. Normal ICC-profiles are in other words a compromise: the TIC will limit all colours to one top value for TIC.
One more example: for newsprint we have reached a TIC, for neutral black, around 180% with a better L-value then ISOnewspaper26v4 - but a dark red can in the same print reach 209%.
And so on.
So, good bye to "opinions", "gray hair" and "experience" or what is your opinion and experience regarding TIC?
Best regards
A Sebastian
At 09:35 29-3-2008 -0700, A Sebastian wrote:
>This way we reach a TIC in neutral black that is 233% (two hundred and
>thirty three)! In other words: we print neutral black with L=11 with 233%.
>Note: This technology do not set the TIC limit to 233 for all colours, it
>is indvidual. A dark red can for example end up 244%. Normal ICC-profiles
>are in other words a compromise: the TIC will limit all colours to one top
>value for TIC.
>One more example: for newsprint we have reached a TIC, for neutral black,
>around 180% with a better L-value then ISOnewspaper26v4 - but a dark red
>can in the same print reach 209%.
>And so on.
Nice figures but it's good to know how the CMYK combinations were created.
Maximum K of 100%? "Dark Red" in newsprint 244% with still cyan in it
instead of K?
Or in other words how long and how wide are the GCR settings for these
profiles?
Henk (Partly gray and no gray component replacement!)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Gianotten, Prins Hendriklaan 58 3761 DW Soest, Netherlands
Tel. +31 (0)35 60 12 206 Fax: +31 (0)84 73 04 497 e-mail: henk(a)gianotten.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will be out of the office starting 07/03/2008 and will not return until
01/04/2008.
I'm currently out of the office on paternity leave.
Your UK contacts in my absence will be -
Phil Deane
Email: philip.deane(a)rrd.com
Office: +44 (0)1423 796440
Steve Fisher
Email: stephen.fisher(a)rrd.com
Office: +44 (0)1423 796107
Many thanks,
Regards, John.
Hello Peter, hello list
May be, we both are using different definitions about "device
independent workflows".
For me a device independent workflows based on PDF/X must include:
- predictable and pleasant colormanagement of images and vector graphics
- easy integration printing processes with very different colors for
the primaries (e.g. offset according ISO 12647-2 and gravure printing
according PSR ECI
- Independence of profiling vendors
- defined procedures for the quality control of all color
transformations in the workflow
Neither ECI, ICC, ISO TC 130 or GWG have ever published a guideline and
tested in practice how this could be realized with PDF/3 or PDF/X-4
containing ICCbased objects.
You may be able to use PDF/X-3 or PDF/X-4 in repro inhouse workflows as
an internal color master, if you have the control over the complete
creation of the layout documents, the master PDF/X files and the
profiles for all printing conditions in the workflow. File format
delivered to the printer should then always be PDF/X-1a or CMYKonly
PDF/X-4 (plus Spotcolor if necessary).
If we are talking about controlled color transformations of incoming
PDF/X files at the printer. PDF/X-1a or CMYKonly PDF/X-4 in combination
with devicelink based color servers are today the only available
technology which is able to full fill all the points I described at the
beginning of the mail.
Regards
Jan-Peter
Peter Kleinheider wrote:
> Jan-Peter,
>
> having set up quite some device independent workflow's in the past, I
> do not agree to your statement.
> If you can make sure that BPC is used at the end doing the final color
> conversion, than this is a pragmatic workaround.
>
> However I agree, that this can be a pitfall if such a PDF is sent to
> an "unknown" site which has BPC turned of (or BPC even not available).
>
> Nevertheless, it works.
>
>> For the future, I hope that ISO TC 130 and/or GWG specify a "CMYKonly
>> PDF/X-4" version (or GWG recommendation) like PDF/X-1a plus
>> transparencies.
>> A "CMYKonly PDF/X-4" recommendation by GWG would have the advantage,
>> that it could be specified on top of the ISO standard PDF/X-4 without
>> the need to change the ISO-standard itself. This could be realized in
>> months instead of years for the ISO procedures...
>
> Being partly responsible for that I can tell you that we were in fact
> discussing such a new spec at the last meeting. However, we also have
> the demand to allow icc based elements (still disallowing
> ICCbasedCMYK) in a PDF. For that PDF/X-4 has already most of the
> provisions we need.
>
> It would be great the hear the opinion of other users on this idea?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Peter Kleinheider
> Co-Chair Colormanagement Subcommittee of GWG
>
--
*********** Neue Adresse / new adress ************
homann colormanagement ------ fon/fax +49 30 611 075 18
Jan-Peter Homann ------------- mobile +49 171 54 70 358
Christinenstr. 21 ------ http://www.colormanagement.de
10119 Berlin -------- mailto:homann@colormanagement.de
*********** Neue Adresse / new adress ************
Like many people say we could do converting in the workflow.
But I really don't like to do any changes.
I would like my client to use ISO profiles that are set to 260% uncoated and 300% for coated. (Maybe less because of all the perfector machines out there 290% coated)
If I was a designer I don't like the printer shop to modify any of my files.
So instead of change customer files I rather learn them
how to use the right profiles.
We set up rule how our files should be produce and the customer work after these rules. We cant get it right from all customer but that is the main goal.
To make is easy for customer to use profiles from ECI
Would be that In the profile name it should say web or sheetfed
Designer like lot´s of ink and in web press you could have higher TAC
than sheetfeed macines
I think ECI need to make new standard profiles like
WEBPRESS STANDARD
ISOwebcoatedxxx%.icc
ISOwebuncoatedxxx%.icc
SHEETFEED STANDARD
ISOSheetfeedcoatedxxx%.icc
ISOSheetfeeduncoatedxxx%.icc
Best Regards
Morgan Axelsson
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com [mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com] För eci-en-request(a)lists.callassoftware.com
Skickat: den 14 mars 2008 15:02
Till: eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com
Ämne: ECI-EN Digest, Vol 25, Issue 14
Send ECI-EN mailing list submissions to
eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
eci-en-request(a)lists.callassoftware.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
eci-en-owner(a)lists.callassoftware.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ECI-EN digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. TAC of ISOuncoated profile (Jo Brunenberg)
2. Re: TAC of ISOuncoated profile (Magnus Sandstr?m)
3. Re: TAC of ISOuncoated profile (Florian S??l)
4. Re: TAC of ISOuncoated profile (Henk Gianotten)
5. Re: RGB and CMYK files in a PDF/X-3:2002 file (Jo Brunenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:31:01 +0100
From: "Jo Brunenberg" <jo.brunenberg(a)rsdb.com>
Subject: [ECI-EN] TAC of ISOuncoated profile
To: eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com
Message-ID:
<fc.000f5799041e7a5c3b9aca008fe1aa05.2b574f6(a)rotonet.rsdb.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Concerning: TAC of ISOuncoated profile
Following the question of Morgan I have a question as well on this subject:
- Is the present TAC value in the ISOuncoated profile (320%) acceptable for sheetfed offset printers? As Morgan states that it is too high for his press room I am wondering what are the experiences of other sheetfed offset printers?
- By the way: We are using a modified version (TAC 240%) of this profile for web offset.
Best regards,
Jo Brunenberg
ROTO SMEETS
eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com,Internet writes:
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:11:40 +0100
>From: Morgan Axelsson <morgan.axelsson(a)atta45.se>
>Subject: [ECI-EN] Uncoated paper in Sheetfed enviroment
>To: eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com
>Message-ID: <F5356E56-606F-4BDA-878B-0B966260F9BB(a)atta45.se>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>I dont know were to go
>At our printphop we have Heidelberg sheetfed presses
>Two 8c 70x100
>One 8c 50x70
>one 5c 70x100
>
>We are thinking of changing our colour management workflow into ISO
>standard
>the
>ISOcoated_v2_300_eci Will probebly work fine
>but the
>ISOuncoated
>We have a problem with that profile, it?s set to total ink coverage of
>320% even more than the coated one
>These days we have around 260% of total ink coverage on uncoated paper
>in sheetfeed environment
>
>This is a problem we have if we should make it easy for our client to
>start using ISO standard
>
>Do any have any solution or idea for future ISO profiles for sheetfed
>presses
>
>Regards
>Morgan Axelsson
