Hello all,
one big issue here is that the term 'gray balance' has been changed,
particularly in means of colormanagement. Roughly spoken, 'gray
balance' in pre-colorimetry meaning was based more on experience and
was used to run the press under the best compromise between desired
density, dot gain and visual neutral gray appearance, if used at all.
Nowadays sophisticated procedures (based on colorimetry and
colormanagement) and environments result in a much more precise
analysis and objective description of the term 'gray balance'. The
general conclusion here is that the resulting gray balance always ends
up in individual values, depending on the process and inks an so on
(considered to be gray in means of L* X, a+b=0).
However, if we talk about standards and reference data, the gray
balance becomes a central control factor again. If we standardise
primaries (in LAB), dot gain an densities on certain paper within one
printing condition (ISOcoated for example), this specific individual
ISOcoated-gray balance should match. Naturally, every ISO (uncoated,
shetfeed, ...) generates its own gray balance, but then in a reference
meaning.
Therefore, people in 'less sophisticated environment' can still use
'old fashioned visual process control' - but then based on scientific
determined defaults.
Regards, Andre Schuetzenhofer
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Am 4. Aug 2004 um 17:29 schrieb Henk Gianotten:
Mr. Bestmann,
You are right.
You was the man who explained in detail why we did not need gray
balance any more in the latest ISO 1247-2:2004 descriptions.
However,
I don't agree that we would have the right to treat you as the "bad"
guy.
In this case you was the source of the information and the messenger.
In the past we did not have the tools nor the complete knowledge to
drive our presses without gray balance information. The members to
this list know how to value the data of nowadays spectral meters.
However, for a long time printers in less sophisticated environments
were (and still are) are forced to use the old technologies to run
their old presses, even without a densitometer.
It's good to see that you are continuously offering your help to apply
these new standards.
With tight margins and shared responsibilities between designers,
prepress and
printers we need the standards to make the arrangements between all
members in the complete chain, between customer and delivered product.
Any of your "corrections" or additions to use the new standards in our
production is highly appreciated. Even if we have to redefine our
goals or (as a consultant) have to modify our presentations!
So continue to act the way you do. In my opinion you (and your
colleges in Heidelberg, ECI and MedienStandard Druck) show a "good
guy" attitude.
regards, Henk
.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Henk Gianotten, Prins Hendriklaan 58 3761 DW Soest, Netherlands
Tel. + Fax: +31 (0)35 60 122 06 e-mail: henk(a)gianotten.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
_______________________________________________
ECI-EN mailing list
ECI-EN(a)lists.transmedia.de
http://lists.transmedia.de/mailman/listinfo/eci-en
CON·CEPT·PRO GmbH - consulting and production by concept
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Postanschrift: Postfach 10 28 35 · 50468 Köln
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Standort Langenfeld: Kronprinzstraße 54 · 40764 Langenfeld
tele +49(0)2173-3993 phone +363 fax +308 | cell +49(0)172-208 32 73
a.schuetzenhofer(a)con-cept-pro.com
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Standort | Sitz Köln: Ehrenstraße 88 · 50672 Köln
phone|fax: +49 (0) 221 - 255 254 | cell +49 (0) 172 - 21 28 104
j.erpenbach(a)con-cept-pro.com
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
http://www.con-cept-pro.com