Hi Alessandro, let me add to Juergen’s response: In my view this unbalance is only affected when people using it wrongly (unintentionally interpreting F53 data as Offset data such as F39, F51 or GraCol 2013). In this case people would be annoyed … But I would respond that they made the error beforehand. Nevertheless I understand this fall back scenario and we have it on our list for a potential successor. But right now I would focus on test that are „in scope“ … Good luck for your TAGA conference! regards Andy Register for the Fogra colour management symposium 2018 ! Our quality, neutrality ------------------------------------------------ Dr.-Ing. Andreas Kraushaar Dept. Prepress Forschungsinstitut für Medientechnologien e.V. Fogra Research Institute for Media Technologies Einsteinring 1a 85609 Aschheim near Munich Telefon: +49 89. 431 82 - 335 Telefax: +49 89. 431 82 - 100 E-mail: kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:kraushaar@fogra.org> Internet: www.fogra.org<http://www.fogra.org> ----------------------------------------------------------------- Managing Director: Dr. Eduard Neufeld | Registered Office: Munich | Register of Associations: VR 4909 Am 15.11.2017 um 16:42 schrieb Juergen Seitz <Juergen.Seitz@gmgcolor.com<mailto:Juergen.Seitz@gmgcolor.com>>: Hi Alessandro, when the colorspace was built, many different digital output spaces were taken into consideration, not only CMYK-based but also some with green, orange, red, blue or violet inks. The intention then was not just to include them, but to keep the basic characteristics (dimensions and color distances) from a CMYK-based characterization. This approach should improve the achievable output quality and the visual color and image consistency, when data is converted from this eciCMYK to whatever (very often CMYK-based) output condition. eciCMYK is developed for color communication and color decision in front of mostly unknown production criteria. With its shape and characteristics, eciCMYK should enable an output-agnostic preparation of print data, with no surprise. Even though quite big, eciCMYK is still proofable with actual proofing devices within typical narrow proofing tolerances. The actual shape of the TVI was trying to keep an equal TVI like we do in Offset printing conditions. But with the significant push of Chroma on the Magenta, this TVI causes the warm grey balance you are referring to. The intended use of eciCMYK is considering a devicelink profiling (like with our ColorServer) to the final output condition…. so the greybalance is adjusted to match the initial idea on that way. Do you see the importance to adjust the grey balance of this colorspace to act more like a typical Offset printing condition? TVIs in this characterization would then be like you describe ‘em: “unbalanced: the M values are really low”. Kind regards 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 Beltrami, Alessandro Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. November 2017 13:38 An: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com> Betreff: [ECI-EN] eciCMYK gray balance Hi All, someone knows the rationale behind the gray balance used in eciCMYK (FOGRA53)? Converting neutral Lab values to eciCMYK the resulting CMY values are really unbalanced: the M values are really low, that implies an higher TVI on Magenta channel represented on the original FOGRA53 characterization. Thank You _______________________________________________ ECI-EN mailing list ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:ECI-EN@lists.callassoftware.com> http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en