I have now changed the setting on my SpectroEye to measure Absolute White (D50, 2º, no filters, white backing) and have now got a different set of figures. Are these more what you pros would expect?
The Delta E is still too high in all cases!
     
 L93.49 a0.33 b-2.73    stora 115gsm    DeltaE: 6.3  
 L94.62 a0.9 b-4.74     lumisilk 130gsm      DeltaE: 6.5  
 L93.68 a1.43 b-4.71     sappi quatro matt art 115gsm    DeltaE: 7.3  
 L94.14 a0.2 b-2.96  Hi-Q matt art 128gsm    DeltaE: 5.8

Speaking from the print buyer / publishers point of view is there any way of getting LAB from paper manufacturers or better still a list of common papers that fall within the Type 1 or Type 2 tolerances?

I ordered the StoreEnso fan (thanks for the tip) but it does not contain LAB values.

Thanks
Ken Jones
Technical Production Manager

Penguin Group (UK)
80 Strand, London, WC2R 0RL
Direct Dial +44 (0)20 7010 4136


> From: Paul Sherfield <paul.sherfield@ukonline.co.uk>
> Reply-To: <eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>, <paul@missinghorsecons.co.uk>
> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:46:43 +0100
> To: <eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>
> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] ECI-EN Digest, Vol 36, Issue 4
>
> Hi
>
> Yes, I agree these Lab values for the papers listed are not correct. Lumisilk
> is
> very close to the Type 1 paper figures from my readings, just a little higher
> in
> the -b due to the brighters.
>
> I am out of the office at present so have not got the figures to hand.
>
> Paul Sherfield
> By web mail
>
> The Missing Horse Consultancy Ltd
> 07899 906385
>
>
> Quoting eci-en-request@lists.callassoftware.com:
>
>> Send ECI-EN mailing list submissions to
>> eci-en@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@lists.callassoftware.com
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> eci-en-owner@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. Re: FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>>       (Meinecke, Karl Michael (bvdm))
>>    2. Re: FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization (Roger)
>>    3. Re: ECI-EN Digest, Vol 36, Issue 3 (Lee Badham)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:20:15 +0200
>> From: "Meinecke, Karl Michael (bvdm)" <km@bvdm-online.de>
>> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>> To: <eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>
>> Message-ID:
>> <35F02B44B042DA4EBEE4B96DC2F9B67D9EA7@bvdm-exch-1.bvdm-online.de>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> for comparison purposes, please indicate exact papers (stora 115gsm?) and
>> complete, (standard compliant) settings of your SpectroEye measurements, such
>> as
>> Illuminant (D50/2), observer 45/0 0/45, pol. filter (no), UV-cut filter (no),
>> backing (wb) etc.
>>
>> L* values seem to be very high, b* values rather low, compared to typical
>> CIELAB data of type 1 papers.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Karl Michael Meinecke
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com
>>> [mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com] On Behalf Of
>>> Jones, Ken
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 11:20 AM
>>> To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com
>>> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> I too am interested in this subject. It seems that the vast
>>> majority of papers we use as a book publisher are not
>>> matching the ISO12647-2 Type 1 paper colour target of L95 a0
>>> b-2 (white backing) One one hand we are stating that we
>>> require all our printers to now print to
>>> FOGRA39 but then asking them to print on a range of different
>>> papers which may or may not be matching the paper white for
>>> that standard.
>>>
>>> Is this a case of double 'standards'?
>>>  
>>> Some tests done on common papers we use with a SpectroEye
>>>      
>>> stora 115gsm - L99.25 a-0.36 b-0.31 - ?E 4.6 lumisilk 130gsm
>>> - L100.54 a0.1 b-2.14 - ?E 5.5 sappi quatro matt art 115gsm -
>>> L99.6 0.a71 b-2.14 - ?E 4.7 Hi-Q matt art 128gsm - L99.94
>>> a-0.59 b-0.91 - ?E 5.1
>>>
>>> As I understand it ISO12647-2 has a max ?E of 3 so in truth
>>> all these papers fail!
>>>
>>> I am using the Bodoni pressSIGN software to assess colours on
>>> press sheets which apparently has an allowance built in for
>>> different paper colours. I'm told it will sample the paper
>>> colour and then adjust the target colours slightly so we can
>>> still have a useful test whilst allowing for papers that
>>> stray outside the standard. Is this the intelligent way to
>>> get around this real life problem or actually going to
>>> introduce different targets and therefore different final
>>> colours depending on the paper used?
>>>
>>> Discuss :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Ken Jones
>>> Technical Production Manager
>>>
>>> Penguin Group (UK)
>>> 80 Strand, London, WC2R 0RL
>>> Direct Dial +44 (0)20 7010 4136
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: "Meinecke, Karl Michael (bvdm)" <km@bvdm-online.de>
>>>> Reply-To: <eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:40:47 +0200
>>>> To: <eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com>, <homann@colormanagement.de>
>>>> Conversation: [ECI-EN] FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>>>> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>>>>
>>>> Roger, all,
>>>>
>>>> allocation of papers to reference printing conditions
>>> (recommendations
>>>> of paper manufacturers) already exist.
>>>>
>>>> Example: Stora Enso www.stora.com, press selection fan 2009
>>> (order free
>>>> of charge via website)
>>>>
>>> www.storaenso.com/products/publication-papers/order-brochures/
>> Pages/pres
>>>> s-selection-brochures-set.aspx
>>>>
>>>> The press selection fan contains - among other info - Colour
>>>> Profile/CharData recommendations (bvdm/ECI/Fogra) for HSWO
>>> and Gravure
>>>> papers.
>>>> L*a*b* coordinates (D50/2 - ISO 5631-3) for these papers
>>> are provided as
>>>> well.
>>>>
>>>> This is a pragmatic approach and valuable information for printers,
>>>> customers.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Karl Michael
>>>>
>>>> Karl Michael Meinecke
>>>> Bundesverband Druck und Medien e.V. (bvdm)
>>>> German Printing and Media Industries Federation (bvdm)
>>>> Biebricher Allee 79 | D-65187 Wiesbaden
>>>> Fon +49(0)611 80 31 68 | Fax +49(0)611 80 32 68
>>>> mailto:km@bvdm-online.de | URL www.bvdm-online.de
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com
>>>>> [mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com] On Behalf Of Roger
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 6:53 PM
>>>>> To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com; homann@colormanagement.de
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>>>>>
>>>>> Jan-Peter,
>>>>>
>>>>> How, technically, could the paper supplier provide the
>>>>> information "which reference gamut should be applied to his
>>>>> papers to the printers"? Das ist eine blind cheque!
>>>>>
>>>>> Roger
>>>>>
>>>>>> The paper supplier should provide  the information which reference
>>>>>> gamut should be applied to his papers to the printers an big print
>>>>>> buyers which are familiar with colormanagement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>> Jan-Peter
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ECI-EN mailing list
>>>>> ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com
>>>>> http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ECI-EN mailing list
>>>> ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com
>>>> http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en
>>>
>>>
>>>  
>>> This email was sent by a company owned by Pearson plc,
>>> registered office at 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL.
>>> Registered in England and Wales with company number 53723
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ECI-EN mailing list
>>> ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com
>>> http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:44:01 -0400
>> From: Roger <graxx@videotron.ca>
>> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] FOGRA40 SC / 41 MFC paper categorization
>> To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com
>> Message-ID: <009501c9f4da$36d534c0$a47f9e40$@ca>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> I have a hard time with the exceptionally high L* values? The highest I ever
>> seen was 96. But you have 99.94? Even if you measure on white backing, this
>> is still too extreme. Is your SpectroEye photometric scale off? Even when I
>> switch the UV filter on my SpectroEye, here, I can never get such super high
>> L* readings.
>>
>> To come back to your discussion, I personally would not change the target
>> colors to account for the various substrate properties. It's an idea worth
>> discussing but I think it is the wrong approach. Otherwise, everyone is going
>> to start to claim ISO conformance but we'll all have slightly different ink
>> colors. To me, the solids and overprints CIE Lab values are absolute and
>> should not be modified in any way, shape or form since, with the right inks,
>> they are not that very difficult to come by, on a variety of PT1 variants.
>> Matte papers are a different story...
>>
>> Best / Roger
>>  
>>> stora 115gsm - L99.25 a-0.36 b-0.31 - ?E 4.6
>>> lumisilk 130gsm - L100.54 a0.1 b-2.14 - ?E 5.5
>>> sappi quatro matt art 115gsm - L99.6 0.a71 b-2.14 - ?E 4.7
>>> Hi-Q matt art 128gsm - L99.94 a-0.59 b-0.91 - ?E 5.1
>>>
>>> As I understand it ISO12647-2 has a max ?E of 3 so in truth all these
>>> papers
>>> fail!
>>>
>>> I am using the Bodoni pressSIGN software to assess colours on press
>>> sheets
>>> which apparently has an allowance built in for different paper colours.
>>> I'm
>>> told it will sample the paper colour and then adjust the target colours
>>> slightly so we can still have a useful test whilst allowing for papers
>>> that
>>> stray outside the standard. Is this the intelligent way to get around
>>> this
>>> real life problem or actually going to introduce different targets and
>>> therefore different final colours depending on the paper used?
>>>
>>> Discuss :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Ken Jones
>>> Technical Production Manager
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:11:54 +0100
>> From: Lee Badham <lee.b@bodoni.co.uk>
>> Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] ECI-EN Digest, Vol 36, Issue 3
>> To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com
>> Message-ID: <D53704A1-381C-41E6-B578-94A0620C79F2@bodoni.co.uk>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Looking at at those lab values, it seems that there is something  
>> wrong. You cannot get a reflective lab value with an L value greater  
>> than 100.
>>
>> So either:
>> The spectroeye needs calibrating.
>> You are using relative white Lab values
>>
>> I don't think changing the Illuminant, Angle, or Polarization would  
>> ever give those values.
>>
>> Lee Badham
>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> I too am interested in this subject. It seems that the vast majority  
>>> of
>>> papers we use as a book publisher are not matching the ISO12647-2  
>>> Type 1
>>> paper colour target of L95 a0 b-2 (white backing)
>>> One one hand we are stating that we require all our printers to now  
>>> print to
>>> FOGRA39 but then asking them to print on a range of different papers  
>>> which
>>> may or may not be matching the paper white for that standard.
>>>
>>> Is this a case of double 'standards'?
>>>
>>> Some tests done on common papers we use with a SpectroEye
>>>
>>> stora 115gsm - L99.25 a-0.36 b-0.31 - ?E 4.6
>>> lumisilk 130gsm - L100.54 a0.1 b-2.14 - ?E 5.5
>>> sappi quatro matt art 115gsm - L99.6 0.a71 b-2.14 - ?E 4.7
>>> Hi-Q matt art 128gsm - L99.94 a-0.59 b-0.91 - ?E 5.1
>>>
>>> As I understand it ISO12647-2 has a max ?E of 3 so in truth all  
>>> these papers
>>> fail!
>>>
>>> I am using the Bodoni pressSIGN software to assess colours on press  
>>> sheets
>>> which apparently has an allowance built in for different paper  
>>> colours. I'm
>>> told it will sample the paper colour and then adjust the target  
>>> colours
>>> slightly so we can still have a useful test whilst allowing for  
>>> papers that
>>> stray outside the standard. Is this the intelligent way to get  
>>> around this
>>> real life problem or actually going to introduce different targets and
>>> therefore different final colours depending on the paper used?
>>>
>>> Discuss :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Ken Jones
>>> Technical Production Manager
>>>
>>> Penguin Group (UK)
>>> 80 Strand, London, WC2R 0RL
>>> Direct Dial +44 (0)20 7010 4136
>>>
>>
>>
>> Bodoni Systems Ltd
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ECI-EN mailing list
>> ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com
>> http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en
>>
>> End of ECI-EN Digest, Vol 36, Issue 4
>> *************************************
>>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
> _______________________________________________
> ECI-EN mailing list
> ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com
> http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en

_______________________________________________
ECI-EN mailing list
ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com
http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en