Re: [ECI-EN] eci offset profiles surface finished.

Hi Juergen, I’m already aware these modifications. But nevertheless, thank you for sharing your explanations. The images are very instructive indeed. I also prepared some images using the Roman16 too and I noticed there had no big issues between F51 and F49. But as you wisely mentioned, it could be problematic with the paper tint and the curves differences… So, I need to be sure to apply the proper strategy. I don’t want to send an incorrect CYK separation to obtain a final printed job that could be worth than without this adaptation. ☺ Axel From: &lt;eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; on behalf of Juergen Seitz &lt;Juergen.Seitz(a)gmgcolor.com&gt; Reply-To: &quot;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&quot; &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; Date: lundi 6 février 2017 14:16 To: &quot;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&quot; &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] eci offset profiles surface finished. Hi Axel, several changes happened: -since F51 all reference values are described in M1. -since F51 the updated ISO12647-2:2013 rules (e.g. new TVI curves) for the process description (and the resulting characterization data) is used. F49 and F50 are describing laminated Offset prints based on the legacy ISO rules, so they are M0 and the underlying TVI curves are slightly different, just like if you start with F39 and do your lamination on it . Besides of the many other reference printing conditions, these 2 references for a perfect prediction of laminated F51-products are on the long list. But: I think that you can still use F49 and F50 to get an estimate of a laminated product, even in front of a F51 production. Maybe after a compensation of the F49 or F50 to the right whitepoint? The major difference would then just be the changed TVI. If you compare the variance, you might consider to keep going with F49/50 for the time being. Have a look at some samples comparing F39, 49, 50 and 51: https://owncloud.gmgcolor.com/owncloud/index.php/s/hRKXdaBdgGjPk23 Based on some F39 data, without any change on the CMYK values, I have just created a preview on how these CMYK values would look like (in Lab), according the different char-datasets. Open the tifs in Photoshop and go through the 4 Layers on each sample. If you compare F39 to F51 you will see the most significant change from the papertint and in the quarter tones (have a look at the skintones) If you compare F39 to either F49 or F50, you can see this much more important impact. … so I think that even now, F49 and F50 are a good tool to be used, even in front of a F51 production. Cheers Juergen Von: eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com> [mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com] Im Auftrag von Axel Robert Gesendet: Montag, 6. Februar 2017 09:12 An: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com> Betreff: [ECI-EN] eci offset profiles surface finished. Priorität: Hoch Dear all, I would like to obtain more information about the following ICC profiles: PSO_Coated_v2_300_Glossy_laminate_eci.icc PSO_Coated_v2_300_Matte_laminate_eci.icc I partially switched from F39 to F51 and F47 to F52. But I still use the former (aka F49 and F50). Should I take into account they also will change since the new printing conditions? Are they still relevant? Or should they be adapted? And if so, when or how? Thank you for your answer. Regards. Axel Axel Robert | Prepress Manager Ubisoft EMEA |Manufacturing 28, rue Armand Carrel | 93100 Montreuil | France Tel: +33(0)1 48 18 52 03 | Skype: axelprepress