Hi Paul und Jan-Peter,
This is the same issue as proofing SWOPv2 AbsCol while actually printing to
a more neutral substrate. Same issue, same problem, same situation. The way
I look at it, if I adapt the SWOPv2 colorimetry to the actual substrate
white point, I am doing my client and my pressman a service, making their
lives easier, das ist richtig. Aber, with every change in substrate white
point that will come along in the future, this means I will have to repeat
the exercise everytime. In my opinion, I think it is "better" NOT to adapt
the proof. If the substrate is more yellow than the proof then we should
expect at least a "relative" match. The tones on the print will not match
the tones on the proof "absolutely" but should still match relatively, the
observer should have no problem recognizing the relationship between the
print and the proof. The problem is in the original dataset itself: why was
a substrate with such a yellow white point chosen in the first place? Was
that substrate really representative of "typical" SC paper existing on the
market? On the other hand, we cannot blame paper mills to constantly refine
the competitiveness of their product, by adding optical brighteners or other
agents to their recipe in an effort to make their paper appear brighter and
more desirable to the print buyer. But, in my opinion, that is not the
"standard". And who knows how long will that particular SC paper last on the
market? How long will it take for your client to be offered a more
economical SC paper, with a different white point, maybe more yellowish? We
run in this situation all the time in publication printing. What are
designers and advertisers and publishers to do? Change proofing all the
time? It does not make sense. There can't be perfect predictability. All we
can hope is that the prood adhere to the standard closely. In a way, this
client is using "non-stantard" SC paper. I know this sounds ridiculous but
that it nevertheless the reality and may have to accept the yellowish SC
proof as the "standard" proof. Personally, if you have to change from Fogra
41 to Fogra MFC, to better simulate the final print, I would adapt the white
point of the standard profile you are trying to hit, as per the ISO-12647-1
Annex A, and make a new proof under that newly adapted colorimetry. Or,
another solution, is to make a Relative Colorimetric proof of the yellowish
Fogra 41! Or, if you have a GMG RIP, you could transition the colorimetry to
the proofing substrate paper white, starting from 10% down to 0%. That is
the technique I use here in my company. I would far prefer to proof AbsCol
all the way but I meet fierce resistance with key clients and account
representative when they see paper simulation. So, that way, I get the best
of both worlds, and that way, the pressman tries to match yellowish tones on
more neutral substrates, like in your case.
My two cents / Roger Breton
HI Jan-Peter
I have seed this issue with the Fogra 41 SC profile based on a 'yellow'
white paper point that does not reflect the SC papers available.
I have taken your first option of editing the white paper point in the
SC
profile the solve this issue.
I have not thought of looking at the Fogra 41 based profiles for SC
papers.
Looks as if may be a good idea.
Many thanks
Paul Sherfield
The Missing Horse Consultancy Ltd
Telephone: 01442 871752
Mobile: 07899 906385
P Save Paper - Do you really need to print this e-mail?
http://www.missinghorsecons.co.uk
Apple Solutions Expert-Print & Publishing
Member - UK TC130 Technical Advisory Group (ISO 12647 Printing
Standards)
Member - BPIF Technical Standards Committee
This email and any attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely
for the use of addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this
message, any disclosure, copying or other distribution is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
and
delete all copies from your system. Email may be susceptible to data
corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment.
We do not accept liability for any such corruption, interception or
amendment or the consequences thereof. We do not accept liability for
any
action or inaction by the recipient as a result of advice or
information
contained within this email.
_______________________________________________
ECI-EN mailing list
ECI-EN(a)lists.callassoftware.com
http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en