Send ECI-EN mailing list submissions to eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to eci-en-request(a)lists.callassoftware.com You can reach the person managing the list at eci-en-owner(a)lists.callassoftware.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ECI-EN digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Fogra51 and 52 looks warmer compared to 39L (Matthias Wessman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 08:12:02 +0000 From: Matthias Wessman &lt;mawe(a)dgli.se&gt; Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] Fogra51 and 52 looks warmer compared to 39L To: &quot;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&quot; &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;7F3E8EB2-4018-4193-AC68-4921FE100604(a)dgli.se&gt; Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hello, I had the same problem when implementing F51 (EPSON printer w M1 Spectroproofer and CGS ORIS RIP). It was the paper white simulation from the profile/measurement data that added red to both objects and images. It wasn?t always easy to see but sometimes completely disturbing in highlights. The resolution to this was to remove the paper white simulation from the calibration completely and also switch to another F51 approved paper brand. If anything the F51 should look ?cooler? than F39. BR Matthias Wessman Fr?n: &lt;eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; p? uppdrag av Studio < studio(a)dawkinscolour.co.uk&gt; Svara till: &quot;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&quot; < eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; Datum: fredag 13 mars 2020 18:44 Till: &quot;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&quot; &lt;eci-en(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; ?mne: Re: [ECI-EN] Fogra51 and 52 looks warmer compared to 39L Thanks for your reply. We have been extensively testing different environments/viewers, ways of converting images/profiles etc. No matter what we do they always seem warmer/more red compared to what we?re used to with 39L Have you heard of this problem from anyone/anywhere else? Many thanks Simon On 13 Mar 2020, at 17:36, <graxx@videotron.ca<mailto:graxx@videotron.ca>> <graxx@videotron.ca<mailto:graxx@videotron.ca>> wrote: It looks like you have all the "components" correct. M1 measurements. Fogra51 and 52 approved proofing media. ISO-3669:2009 illumination. Are you comparing: a) images converted to Fogra39 and proofed on Fogra39 approved proofing media to b) images converted to Fogra51 and Fogra52 proofed on Fogra51 and Fogra52 approved media? Out of curiosity, please try compare your proofs under direct sunlight... / Roger -----Original Message----- From: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&lt;mailtolto: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; < eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&lt;mailtolto: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt;&gt; On Behalf Of Studio Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 1:31 PM To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] Fogra51 and 52 looks warmer compared to 39L Yes we are, it?s built into our Epson machines On 13 Mar 2020, at 17:03, <graxx@videotron.ca<mailto:graxx@videotron.ca>> <graxx@videotron.ca<mailto:graxx@videotron.ca>> wrote: Are you using an M1 measuring device on your proofer? / Roger -----Original Message----- From: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&lt;mailtolto: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; < eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&lt;mailtolto: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt;&gt; On Behalf Of Studio Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 1:02 PM To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com Subject: Re: [ECI-EN] Fogra51 and 52 looks warmer compared to 39L No we?re proofing on Fogra 51 and 52 approved paper. On 13 Mar 2020, at 16:39, <graxx@videotron.ca<mailto:graxx@videotron.ca>> <graxx@videotron.ca<mailto:graxx@videotron.ca>> wrote: Are you proofing Fogra 51L and 52L on "Fogra approved 39L stock"? MfG / Roger Breton www.graxx.ca -----Original Message----- From: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&lt;mailtolto: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt; < eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&lt;mailtolto: eci-en-bounces(a)lists.callassoftware.com&gt;&gt; On Behalf Of Studio Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 12:04 PM To: eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com<mailto:eci-en@lists.callassoftware.com Cc: John Bodkin &lt;john.bodkin(a)dawkinscolour.co.uk&lt;mailtomailto: john.bodkin(a)dawkinscolour.co.uk&gt;&gt; Subject: [ECI-EN] Fogra51 and 52 looks warmer compared to 39L I wonder if you can help me. We have recently upgraded our Epson proofers and EFI RIP in order to have the facility to produce Fogra certified proofs to 51L and 52L specifications. Having spent quite a long while creating media profiles for both of these plus 39L, it seems that all Fogra 51 and 52 proofs appear ?warmer? than 39L results. We have been using 39L for many years now and have superb results. Part of our work is fine art photography reproduction, so accurate colour is essential. When proofing on our Fogra approved 39L stock, the results are as we would expect. Not so with 51 and 52. We have a viewing booth fitted with the latest generation VeriVide tubes conforming to ISO 3664:2009 conditions. All proofs we produce pass Fogra certification with very low deltaE values, but 51 and 52 proofs always differ from 39L. I have had proofs made by a qualified third party and their results mirror ours. Could you give me any advice as to whether this problem can be resolved? Yours Faithfully, John Bodkin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.callassoftware.com/pipermail/eci-en/attachments/20200316/3a05a… ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ECI-EN mailing list ECI-EN(a)lists.callassoftware.com http://lists.callassoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/eci-en End of ECI-EN Digest, Vol 90, Issue 3 *************************************