New Product for Ink Optimization

[tmiller_iluvprinting]

I believe tools such as ICE and their subsequent results will fall under the G7 Extreme compliance level. There are 4 levels of G7 compliance: G7 Grayscale, G7 Targeted, G7 (Colorspace), and G7 Extreme. G7 Extreme's definition includes devices and process's that have a significantly greater natural color space than any G7 Characterization spec.
Best Regards,
Todd

[Ian Mackenzie]

Tmason,

Great points. (Caveat: my compnay has a very close relationship with Fine Eye Color Solutions, the maker of ICE)

At its core, ICE is a new color separation technology. Used in a certain way, it can enhance the G7 printing process. Yet it can also apply to SWOP, SNAP and Fogra. ICE has the ability to map and optimize separations for specific substrates. Used and marketed in a positive way, it may gave print buyers and print providers a value-add option to offer to their clients.

ICE is colorimetrically accurate. Should the user of ICE not want to extend the gamut, then that is easily achieved. ICE's other benefits remain: significant ink savings, greater contrast, greater stability, less retouching, etc.

Yes, GRACoL Extreme is on the horizon and has been endorsed and published by the IDEAlliance. ICE integrates smoothly with any existing G7 implementation to work within G7 or G7 Extreme. ICE is an enabling technology. ICE has the ability to increase the visual appeal of print while decreasing its manufacturing costs. This can be a win-win for both print buyer and print provider. Once the spec is published and posted, then it can be easily scaled for any "distribute and print" application.

It can also be proofed and we provide profiles for our Validation(tm) Media. We will have all these samples at our booth (4443) at Print '09 with all details about how they were printed.

feel free to ping me offline if you would like to continue this discussion or receive white papers, etc. that describe the methodology.

Thanks,
Ian

ian@chromaticity.com

[gordo]

To Tmason:

What you are describing is the targeting of a print characteristic (in your case G7) - that is a business decision rather than a technical one as you note when you said: "The print buyer can give a job to a G7 printer in Chicago and a companion piece to their source in L.A. and the end product will match."
However, not every print buyer is concerned with color aligning from printers in different geographic areas in which case G7 may have no value to them and your adherence to the GRACoL 7 print characteristic may actually put you at a competitive disadvantage against another printer. For example, a printer that runs their presswork at higher SIDs and who uses FM screening.

You basically have three strategy options:
• Strategy One: Targeting an Industry Defined Specification - where the press aligns to the proof (with the proof representing the specification (e.g. SWOP, GRACoL 7 etc.)

• Strategy Two: Proofing to a Shop-Specific Presswork Target - where the proof aligns to the press

• Strategy Three: - Align to Your Customer which allows you to switch between strategy one and two as your customer needs change.

( BTW Strategy three is my preferred strategy for commercial printers)

More info about this is here: Quality In Print: Press and proof alignment strategies

What I cynically believe that the GRACoL committee is trying to do with its "extreme" initiative is to formalize a specification for a non-standard (e.g. G7) print characteristic. Which is oxymoronic, but likely a way to generate more money for idealliance and consultants.
Personally, I believe that, where appropriate, printers should define their own unique print characteristic so they have a way to differentiate themselves rather than adhere to a different formalized third party standard "extreme" print characteristic that any other printer could adopt.

Incidentally, there are some confusing/mixed assertions in this thread. Namely:

1) Printers are reseparating images and applying heavy GCR in order (among other things) to reduce ink usage. That's great. However, the final presswork should look the same as the presswork would have looked without being reseparated. ( there is an 8 part post on this topic here: Quality In Print: GCR Reseparation for ink savings and color stability in offset printing - part 1 of 8 )

2) Printing at higher SIDs provides presswork that is visually more impactful compared to presswork run to industry specification - e.g. G7. That is also great - where appropriate. It is not a new concept (there is a 5 part post on this method here: Quality In Print: Printing at DMaxx - part 1 of 5 )

3) Printing at higher SIDs while using GCR (or proprietary) techniques delivers: 20% increased gamut with 20%- 45%! ink savings (one assumes compared with G7). Those are quantitative vendor assertions which need to be backed up with credible, unambiguous, formal test results rather than anecdotal claims or customer testimonials.

best, gordon p

[tmason]

As I said, we became a G7 printer mainly to help us tighten our controls with our proofs calibrated to our presses. This has worked well for our shop and we are very diligent about maintaining the integrity of our proof to press match and the processes that monitor and control the variables. We do market this and the ability to match a G7 printer in another shop.

I am with you Gordo about the "Extreme" specification for G7. Seems fishy.

Maybe we should dump our G7 status and the annual dues that come with it since we have our house standard; because the reality is, there are too many variables throughout our industry to make color consistency possible between shops. We will definitely change our marketing techniques so we don't misrepresent the advantages of G7 or create unrealistic expectations for our customers. Unfortunately, this is how G7 was marketed to us.

BTW, our proof to press match is awesome!

Todd

[Ian Mackenzie]

tmason,

what i have maintained throughout this thread's lifecycle is that ICE can only be truly evaluated objectively by you, in your shop, with your work, on your terms. this is available to you without cost and with no obligation.

show the results it to the head sales person.
find out if there are, in fact, cost savings.
ask your lead pressmen what he thinks?
show the results to a couple of good customers.

If you have more than $6M in color (litho) print sales today, then ICE will probably pay for itself in under a year while delivering qulaity results along the way. Our "claims" come from our customers.

ICE maintains the gray balance and tonality of GRACoL and extends the gamut in saturated colors. We have samples that we can also send you that basically show:

- This is GRACoL
- This is GRACoL "on ICE"

The choice will always be there for you and your customer to use when and if you see fit.

[gordo]

To Tmason,

In the majority of the shops that I've visited or spoken to (hundreds) - the response to print buyers/specifiers when asked if the print shop prints to G7/GRACoL 7 is "yes" (when they do) and that appears sufficient for the print customer - i.e. they don't ask to see any documentation that proves the shop is certified. Interestingly, some shops will say instead that they print to the ISO specification since it is international and was the basis for GRACoL 7 and that satisfies the print buyer - no documentation required.

You are quite right about becoming a G7 printer mainly to help you tighten your controls and aligning proofs and presswork. I've heard that benefit expressed by most printers I've spoken with. It's not the G7 itself, it's the adoption of targets, standards, specifications, and documented methods that brings the benefits.

best, gordon p

[gordo]

tmason,
what i have maintained throughout this thread's lifecycle is that ICE can only be truly evaluated objectively by you, in your shop, with your work, on your terms. this is available to you without cost and with no obligation.[SNIP]

Unfortunately most printers do not have the skills, time, or resources to be effective test pilots.

The following posts contain suggestions for evaluating competing vendor ink savings offerings:

Testing on press: Quality In Print: GCR Reseparation for ink savings and color stability in offset printing - part 8 of 8

Evaluating implementation: Quality In Print: GCR Reseparation for ink savings and color stability in offset printing - part 7 of 8

Potential issues: Quality In Print: GCR Reseparation for ink savings and color stability in offset printing - part 6 of 8

best, gordon p

[Ian Mackenzie]

Unfortunately most printers do not have the skills, time, or resources to be effective test pilots.

True.
That's what makes freedom of choice such a beautiful thing.

If there are choices - test or not to test - and options - G7 or G7 Extreme, then personal preferences or client-driven requests can be handled seemlessly.

time and resources - imo - are well spent on potential solutions that can save money, make clients happy and differentaite from competitors. This holds true for the newest press, latest RIP or new chinese plate technology.

[tmason]

I contacted Chromaticity about a month ago to explore this product. My concern was in the G7 arena and the issues we just discussed. I am going to check out the Chromaticity booth at the show coming up in a few weeks and set up the test. We run quarterly linear tests on our six color presses and qualify any new products at the same time. We can easily incorporate a heads up comparison for this product.

I am expecting to see increased gamut with higher SID's however I am not sure about the ink savings and really am not concerned about that. If this product works, we will use it to gain better control over our process. This should allow for more latitude on press with better color control. We will see if it is as easy as they claim.

On another note, the more I think about the ideology of G7, the more it bothers me.

Here is a paragraph from the Idealliance paper titled "Why should you employ G7; the new proof to print process"
"Because G7 enables printers to use the CTP process to force a press to reproduce visual images with a similar visual appearance, G7 also enables printers to split jobs across printing devices or even across locations. Printing to the NUMBERS with G7 means printers can use different equipment, even in different locations, to print materials that look quite similar to the human eye. Reports indicate jobs split across an old piece of equipment and a new one produce pages that look so much alike that no one can tell which sheet came from which press"

I guess we read too much into this when we signed up for G7. The key is printing to the numbers and G7 is based on ISO numbers. When we run 20% more SID's we are not adhering to the NUMBERS therefore we will not match. Extreme G7 it is. It seems very political to have Extreme G7.

I will keep you all posted.

Todd

[tmiller_iluvprinting]

I think it should be noted that IDEAlliance is a non-profit organization. Just to quell any conspiracy theories!
Best regards,
Todd