10:05 a.m.
Hi Andy, All,
I'm surprised that SpotOn is preferred.
The b* value of the majority of the analyzed production papers (from Fogra 60.055) show a
range of -4 to -8.
Thus I'd expect better proof to print matches using FOGRA51beta with a b* of -6.
Can people opting for SpotOn (b*= -4) enlighten me/us why SpotOn is preferred?
Thanks and best regards
Claas
Am 07.07.2014 um 08:53 schrieb Andreas Kraushaar <Kraushaar(a)fogra.org>rg>:
Dear members of the DPWG,
the printing tests regarding the characterization data that correspond to the new
printing conditions defined in ISO 12647-2 are under way. For the most important printing
condition, PC 1 - offset printing on coated stock, there are two candidates available (PC1
Spot on and a more blueish version currently labeled “FOGRA51beta”). We would like to
quickly respond to the market needs and we see (from the participating folks) a motion
toward Spot On.
Our findings also indicate that the colour differences between both candidates are too
small to justify individual printing conditions. So from Fogra point of view FOGRA51 will
either cover the current candidate (the result from the research project 60.055) or the
PC1 Spot On dataset.
So please consult Fred15 (http://www.eci.org/en/projects/fred15) and let us know you
findings, comments.
regards
Andy Kraushaar
PS: The ECI mailing list can be also be used for sure :-)
Follow us on Twitter - twitter.com/fogra.org<http://twitter.com/fogra.org>
Dr.-Ing. Andreas Kraushaar
Dept. Prepress
Fogra Graphic Technology Research Association
Streitfeldstrasse 19
81673 Munich, Germany
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>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not an addressee or otherwise authorized to receive this message,
you should not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this e-mail
or any information contained in the message. If you have received this
material in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
delete this message.
Managing Director: Dr. Eduard Neufeld | Registered Office: Munich | Register
of Associations: VR 4909
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
Dpwg(a)lists.fogra.org
http://lists.fogra.org/listinfo/dpwg
10:41 a.m.
New subject: [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2 printing tests
Hi Claas, all,
simply spoken: if we are not providing a "spot on" printing condition
(Characterisation Data, Profile), the revised ISO 12647-2:2013 is no longer a valid
reference.
Why is the given value in the new standard (b*-4) and our printing condition shows a
different value (b*-6)?? Nobody will understand this.
The print tests (more than 15 series already finalized at various printers, Fogra,
Heidelberg) produced good results for PC1 with the "spot on" printing condition.
I see no preference for FOGRA51beta.
Best regards
Karl Michael
Freundliche Gru:sse - Best Regards
Karl Michael Meinecke
Referat Technik + Forschung
[bvdm_rgb Kopie1]
Bundesverband Druck und Medien e.V. (bvdm)
German Printing and Media Industries Federation (bvdm)
Friedrichstrasse 194-199 | DE-10117 Berlin
Fon +49 (0) 30 20 91 39 162 | Fax +49 (0) 30 20 91 39 113
mailto:km@bvdm-online.de | URL www.bvdm-online.de<http://www.bvdm-online.de/
NEU Altona Test Suite Application Kit
www.altonatestsuite.com<http://www.altonatestsuite.com/
NEU ProzessStandard Offsetdruck
www.prozess-standard.com<http://www.prozess-standard.com/
PSO ProcessStandard Offset ISO 12647
www.pso-insider.de<http://www.pso-insider.de/
R16 roman16 bvdm Reference Images www.roman16.com<http://www.roman16.com/ CO2 Klimainitiative vdm - Climate initiative
www.klima-druck.de<http://www.klima-druck.de/
MSD MedienStandard Druck
www.point-online.de/download/pdf/free/86035.pdf<http://www.point-online.…
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dpwg [mailto:dpwg-bounces@lists.fogra.org] Im Auftrag von Claas Bickeböller
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Juli 2014 10:05
An: Mailinglist for DPWG Members
Cc: eci(a)lists.callassoftware.com; eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com
Betreff: Re: [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2 printing tests
Hi Andy, All,
I'm surprised that SpotOn is preferred.
The b* value of the majority of the analyzed production papers (from Fogra 60.055) show a
range of -4 to -8.
Thus I'd expect better proof to print matches using FOGRA51beta with a b* of -6.
Can people opting for SpotOn (b*= -4) enlighten me/us why SpotOn is preferred?
Thanks and best regards
Claas
Am 07.07.2014 um 08:53 schrieb Andreas Kraushaar
<Kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:Kraushaar@fogra.org>>:
> Internet:
www.fogra.org<http://www.fogra.org<http://www.fogra.org%3chttp:/www.f…
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
Dpwg@lists.fogra.org<mailto:Dpwg@lists.fogra.org
http://lists.fogra.org/listinfo/dpwg
Dear members of the DPWG,
the printing tests regarding the characterization data
that correspond to the new printing conditions defined in ISO 12647-2 are under way. For
the most important printing condition, PC 1 - offset printing on coated stock, there are
two candidates available (PC1 Spot on and a more blueish version currently labeled
"FOGRA51beta"). We would like to quickly respond to the market needs and we see
(from the participating folks) a motion toward Spot On.
Our findings also indicate that the colour differences
between both candidates are too small to justify individual printing conditions. So from
Fogra point of view FOGRA51 will either cover the current candidate (the result from the
research project 60.055) or the PC1 Spot On dataset.
So please consult Fred15
(http://www.eci.org/en/projects/fred15) and let us know you findings, comments.
regards
Andy Kraushaar
PS: The ECI mailing list can be also be used for sure
:-)
Follow us on Twitter -
> twitter.com/fogra.org<http://twitter.com/fogra.org Dr.-Ing. Andreas Kraushaar
Dept. Prepress
Fogra Graphic Technology Research Association
Streitfeldstrasse 19
81673 Munich, Germany
Telefon: +49 89. 431 82 - 335
Telefax: +49 89. 431 82 - 100
> E-mail:
kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:kraushaar@fogra.org%3cmailto:kraushaar@fogra.org>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail message may contain confidential and/or
privileged information.
If you are not an addressee or otherwise authorized to
receive this
message, you should not use, copy, disclose or take
any action based
on this e-mail or any information contained in the
message. If you
have received this material in error, please advise
the sender
immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message.
Managing Director: Dr. Eduard Neufeld | Registered
Office: Munich |
Register of Associations: VR 4909
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
> Dpwg@lists.fogra.org<mailto:Dpwg@lists.fogra.org
6:21 p.m.
New subject: [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2 printing tests
Hello dear friends,
we (GMG) are actually successfully providing seminars where we explain the relation and
the correlation between the several actual standards that are the most important for our
prepress color communication.
-there is the color measurement with its measurement conditions (ISO13655:2009 with M0,
M1, M2 and M3)
-the viewing conditions with their significant change towards a better D50 alike viewing
(according ISO3664:2009)
-and finally we have the updated references for Offset printing in 12647-2:2013
... and if you know these 3 areas and their correlation (which should finally end in a
perfect color communication!), I am really wondering that there are still some of you in
favor of a suboptimal solution. Right now at this momentum where we could really improve
color communication to a new level in quality!
Knowing the correlations between the 3 named standards also means to understand the areas
where the correlation is not so good:
If we compare an average of printing substrates from the market with the reference values
for the more fluorescent papers in 12647-2:2013, it is getting obvious that there is no
good match. When in PS1 it is not dramatic, it is really obvious in PS5 (unfortunately I
can't attach a .jpg here. Please let me know if you want to see a graph, showing
production paper aims versus reference aims).
When we measured a mass of Woodfree Coated Papers, we can see a significant number with
around b*-6 to -7 measured in M1. Spot-on with a b* of -4 is not far away but just enough
to confuse and degrade the potential quality in color communication.
With the comparison of the two competing candidates for Woodfree Uncoated Paper, it is
just becoming cristal clear that those spot-on data are a valid reference maybe for a
precess control but no solution that seem to be ment to be really color accurate.
The M1-targets written in 12647-2:2013 seem to be written at a time when we did not have
the experience with M1-measurement as we have it today... and that's why an
uncertainty of potential side effects and impacts may have led to chose very conservative
values... basically just a kind of translation of M0 to M1, without any real adjustment to
be more relevant to real world production paper (e.g. an Lab from Fogra39, defined in M0
with 95/0/-2 would look something like 95/1/-3.5 in M1 if the bluishness comes from
fluorescence; almost spot on with the actual ISO value).
If we go for spot-on, we will hardly see any difference between legacy M0 and new
M1-proofs ... even though this was one important criteria in the past, that Gracol or
FOGRA39 were too yellowish compared to production stock!?
More than just looking at the references from above, we have to consider a significant
impact of some measurement device manufacturers work for a better traceability of the
color measurement between different devices. Here we could mention the significant impact
on color measurement in prepress that became obvious with the introduction of Xrites
traceability approach, with their XRGA.
The Lab-values for the primaries, written in 12647-2:2013 are unfortunately based on color
measurement before Xrite had worked out a better traceability. This means that we are
referencing to Lab-values that would already today measure some different color angle with
actual measurement technology. If we keep in mind that e.g. the difference between an old
Gretag-measurement (GMDI) shows up to 2,5 DeltaE compared to a new Xrite measurement, we
can see that there is an implicit risk to fail, even in process control.
With the 2 FOGRA-candidates 51 and 52, we can see a very responsible handling of the
involved variables as we can see them in daily practice.
A significantly higher consideration of fluorescent agents, just as it can be seen in the
market place. ... and an adjustment that recognizes the improvents in traceability of our
industries measurement technologies.
I really hope that we will not publish spot-on as THE reference, just because it sounds
more coherent. Latest with the usecases around brightened uncoated papers, we would lose
all credibility.
PS: ... one feedback that I have heard from the US, where they have started much earlier
to push M1-references with e.g. the new Gracol2013, indicates where we are going to be
with the spot-on-set:
"Establishing ideal aims / char data for high-OBA conditions via easy-to-use tools.
With regard to this, I wonder if 12647-2 and 15339 have been published pre-maturely,
before we have settled the OBA related workflow issues."
Kind regards
Juergen
Juergen Seitz
Senior Technical Advisor
[cid:image002.png@01CF9063.38373D20]
------------------------------------------------------
GMG GmbH & Co. KG
Moempelgarder Weg 10
72072 Tuebingen
Germany
Phone: +49 7071 93874-30
Fax: +49 7071 93874-22
Cell: +49 162 2998330
juergen.seitz@gmgcolor.com<mailto:JSeitz@gmgcolor.com> | www.gmgcolor.com
www.facebook.com/gmgcolor.en<http://www.facebook.com/gmgcolor.en> |
http://twitter.com/gmgcolor
------------------------------------------------------
GMG is a leading developer and supplier of high-end color management software solutions
with more than 11,000 systems in use among customers around the globe.
These span a wide range of industries and application areas including advertising
agencies, prepress houses, offset, flexo, packaging, digital, and large-format printers as
well as international gravure printers.
GMG GmbH & Co. KG. Registered Office: Tuebingen. Court of Registration: Stuttgart
Local Court, No. HRA 381463.
General Partner: GMG Verwaltung GmbH. Registered Office: Tuebingen. Court of Registration:
Stuttgart Local Court, No. HRB 382505.
Managing Directors: Ian Scott, Joerg Weihing, Robert Weihing.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is confidential and may be
privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is intended solely for the attention
and use of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone
or e-mail the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system.
Von:
eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com>
[mailto:eci-en-bounces@lists.callassoftware.com] Im Auftrag von Meinecke, Karl Michael
(bvdm)
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Juli 2014 10:41
An: Mailinglist for DPWG Members
Cc: eci@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>;
eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com Betreff: Re: [ECI-EN] [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2
printing tests
Hi Claas, all,
simply spoken: if we are not providing a "spot on" printing condition
(Characterisation Data, Profile), the revised ISO 12647-2:2013 is no longer a valid
reference.
Why is the given value in the new standard (b*-4) and our printing condition shows a
different value (b*-6)?? Nobody will understand this.
The print tests (more than 15 series already finalized at various printers, Fogra,
Heidelberg) produced good results for PC1 with the "spot on" printing condition.
I see no preference for FOGRA51beta.
Best regards
Karl Michael
Freundliche Gru:sse - Best Regards
Karl Michael Meinecke
Referat Technik + Forschung
[bvdm_rgb Kopie1]
Bundesverband Druck und Medien e.V. (bvdm)
German Printing and Media Industries Federation (bvdm)
Friedrichstrasse 194-199 | DE-10117 Berlin
Fon +49 (0) 30 20 91 39 162 | Fax +49 (0) 30 20 91 39 113
mailto:km@bvdm-online.de | URL www.bvdm-online.de<http://www.bvdm-online.de/
NEU Altona Test Suite Application Kit
www.altonatestsuite.com<http://www.altonatestsuite.com/
NEU ProzessStandard Offsetdruck
www.prozess-standard.com<http://www.prozess-standard.com/
PSO ProcessStandard Offset ISO 12647
www.pso-insider.de<http://www.pso-insider.de/
R16 roman16 bvdm Reference Images www.roman16.com<http://www.roman16.com/ CO2 Klimainitiative vdm - Climate initiative
www.klima-druck.de<http://www.klima-druck.de/
MSD MedienStandard Druck
www.point-online.de/download/pdf/free/86035.pdf<http://www.point-online.…
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dpwg [mailto:dpwg-bounces@lists.fogra.org] Im Auftrag von Claas Bickeböller
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Juli 2014 10:05
An: Mailinglist for DPWG Members
Cc: eci@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci@lists.callassoftware.com>;
eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com Betreff: Re: [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2 printing tests
Hi Andy, All,
I'm surprised that SpotOn is preferred.
The b* value of the majority of the analyzed production papers (from Fogra 60.055) show a
range of -4 to -8.
Thus I'd expect better proof to print matches using FOGRA51beta with a b* of -6.
Can people opting for SpotOn (b*= -4) enlighten me/us why SpotOn is preferred?
Thanks and best regards
Claas
Am 07.07.2014 um 08:53 schrieb Andreas Kraushaar
<Kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:Kraushaar@fogra.org>>:
> Internet:
www.fogra.org<http://www.fogra.org<http://www.fogra.org%3chttp:/www.f…
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
Dpwg@lists.fogra.org<mailto:Dpwg@lists.fogra.org
http://lists.fogra.org/listinfo/dpwg
Dear members of the DPWG,
the printing tests regarding the characterization data
that correspond to the new printing conditions defined in ISO 12647-2 are under way. For
the most important printing condition, PC 1 - offset printing on coated stock, there are
two candidates available (PC1 Spot on and a more blueish version currently labeled
"FOGRA51beta"). We would like to quickly respond to the market needs and we see
(from the participating folks) a motion toward Spot On.
Our findings also indicate that the colour differences
between both candidates are too small to justify individual printing conditions. So from
Fogra point of view FOGRA51 will either cover the current candidate (the result from the
research project 60.055) or the PC1 Spot On dataset.
So please consult Fred15
(http://www.eci.org/en/projects/fred15) and let us know you findings, comments.
regards
Andy Kraushaar
PS: The ECI mailing list can be also be used for sure
:-)
Follow us on Twitter -
> twitter.com/fogra.org<http://twitter.com/fogra.org Dr.-Ing. Andreas Kraushaar
Dept. Prepress
Fogra Graphic Technology Research Association
Streitfeldstrasse 19
81673 Munich, Germany
Telefon: +49 89. 431 82 - 335
Telefax: +49 89. 431 82 - 100
> E-mail:
kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:kraushaar@fogra.org<mailto:kraushaar@fogra.org%3cmailto:kraushaar@fogra.org>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail message may contain confidential and/or
privileged information.
If you are not an addressee or otherwise authorized to
receive this
message, you should not use, copy, disclose or take
any action based
on this e-mail or any information contained in the
message. If you
have received this material in error, please advise
the sender
immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message.
Managing Director: Dr. Eduard Neufeld | Registered
Office: Munich |
Register of Associations: VR 4909
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
> Dpwg@lists.fogra.org<mailto:Dpwg@lists.fogra.org
10:43 a.m.
New subject: [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2 printing tests
Hi Claas,
I am in favour of spot on char' data and profiles
Fogra char' data and ECI profiles are means to implement the ISO standard. I am in
favour of spot on, If alternate versions do not solve severe production problems (like PC5
OBA issue) or show significantly better visual results than using spot on. These reasons
do apply for PC5 (wood-free uncoated) but as Andi stated NOT for PC1.
In addition we may offer an extended set of char' data and profiles for blueish
stock.This definitely makes sense for PC5 (wood-free uncoated) and may be usefull for
premium coated as well.
all the best
Florian
Am 07.07.2014 um 10:05 schrieb Claas Bickeböller <lists(a)bickeboeller.name>me>:
Hi Andy, All,
I'm surprised that SpotOn is preferred.
The b* value of the majority of the analyzed production papers (from Fogra 60.055) show a
range of -4 to -8.
Thus I'd expect better proof to print matches using FOGRA51beta with a b* of -6.
Can people opting for SpotOn (b*= -4) enlighten me/us why SpotOn is preferred?
Thanks and best regards
Claas
Am 07.07.2014 um 08:53 schrieb Andreas Kraushaar <Kraushaar(a)fogra.org>rg>:
--
Florian Süßl
Goßlerstraße 29
12161 Berlin
+49 172 3091154
Dear members of the DPWG,
the printing tests regarding the characterization data that correspond to the new
printing conditions defined in ISO 12647-2 are under way. For the most important printing
condition, PC 1 - offset printing on coated stock, there are two candidates available (PC1
Spot on and a more blueish version currently labeled “FOGRA51beta”). We would like to
quickly respond to the market needs and we see (from the participating folks) a motion
toward Spot On.
Our findings also indicate that the colour differences between both candidates are too
small to justify individual printing conditions. So from Fogra point of view FOGRA51 will
either cover the current candidate (the result from the research project 60.055) or the
PC1 Spot On dataset.
So please consult Fred15 (http://www.eci.org/en/projects/fred15) and let us know you
findings, comments.
regards
Andy Kraushaar
PS: The ECI mailing list can be also be used for sure :-)
Follow us on Twitter - twitter.com/fogra.org<http://twitter.com/fogra.org>
Dr.-Ing. Andreas Kraushaar
Dept. Prepress
Fogra Graphic Technology Research Association
Streitfeldstrasse 19
81673 Munich, Germany
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>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not an addressee or otherwise authorized to receive this message,
you should not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this e-mail
or any information contained in the message. If you have received this
material in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
delete this message.
Managing Director: Dr. Eduard Neufeld | Registered Office: Munich | Register
of Associations: VR 4909
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
Dpwg(a)lists.fogra.org
http://lists.fogra.org/listinfo/dpwg
_______________________________________________
Dpwg mailing list
Dpwg(a)lists.fogra.org
http://lists.fogra.org/listinfo/dpwg 
7:01 p.m.
New subject: [Dpwg] ISO 12647-2 printing tests
Hello all,
IMHO, this is not the main objective. With regard to how long new reference is
prepared, it will certainly be better if we choose a better solution, not
quicker. We need a solution that will correspond to reality and it will work
.
Regards,
Kamil Tresnak
Prague
We would like to quickly respond to the market needs
3603
days inactive
3603
days old
eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Claas Bickeböller -
Florian Süßl -
Juergen Seitz -
Kamil Tresnak -
Meinecke, Karl Michael (bvdm)