RGB Workflow Initiative

[gcplau]

In considering wider gamut offered in this digital age by devices such as digital camera, 4K monitor (inmature yet...?), digital printing with toner base, inkjet base or other colorants based, inkjet productions by wide or grandjet using all different kinds of ink colorant.

I believe we have growing need for a more true to life color reproduction workflow (afterall...we look for color reproduction to be as high fidelity as possible, CMYK is an ingenious creation but now we have all the hardware/software to go steps further) ; switching from CMYK to RGB (first come to my mind is sRGB for it's popularity in most screen & web... and it's visual difference with CMYK is relatively not small) is the first thought I had in mind, knowing Adobe RGB and Profoto will be within discussion.

As of now, I invite you Gurus and Specialist to voice your opinion.... then, we'll workout the scope and categorizing the discussion into each focused ones within the whole workflow.

Excitingly waiting your voicing out.

 

[Danny Whitehead]

In general, I find it best to keep photographic imagery in Adobe RGB, right up until the RIP, where it will be converted to the profile of the output device or press standard (Fogra 39). I'll treat vectors and text a little differently, for instance to keep black text on the black plate. And that's mostly for CMYK printing methods. It seems obvious to stay in RGB for inkjets and the like.

 

[prepressdork]

I originally used Adobe RGB for everything but when the universe put digital cameras in everyones hands and virtually all photos captured with them were done using sRGB, I made the switch. With Adobe RGB, I found photos to have more red in them which caused some issues so I ultimately switched to sRGB and RGB images now convert to CMYK much better than before.

 

[gcplau]

Logically...when there're less gamut compression/expansion to take place, there should be less gradation or color shift. Secondly, most computer screen is sRGB instead of AdobeRGB that's also a bonus for the image creator/retoucher who can see what he's doing (if the screen is right, and output device honour full sRGB gamut....that means it's a what you see what you get!...How long we haven't heard about the old word of WYSIWYG?..haha)

 

[gordo]

IMHO I think your premise is incorrect.
Just because the document creator is working in sRGB does not mean that what they see is what they will get.
Also, it is not the gamut capability of the target output device that should determine whether gamut compression should or should not take place.
As a print services provider, the target is to deliver on your print buyer/customer's expectations in print. For example, your customer may need to have their project appear the same across different print media and therefore the gamut capabilities of any specific output device may have to be restricted in order to accomplish that goal. That being said, I agree that an RGB workflow with late binding to CMYK is more efficient and effective but not for the reasons you specify.

 

[MailGuru]

For example, your customer may need to have their project appear the same across different print media and therefore the gamut capabilities of any specific output device may have to be restricted in order to accomplish that goal.

Gordo makes a good point here. Especially in cases where your campaign may be cross or multi-media. In most cases, a printed piece component to a cross media campaign is going to result in the recipient going to a web page (either through the use of a Purl, or, QR Code, or even an email component). All those cross media components are going to display in RGB, and, the client is going to want their printed piece to match, as closely as possible, to the online versions.

 

[gcplau]

Hello Gordo,

Good to see you here.

You said "Just because the document creator is working in sRGB does not mean that what they see is what they will get.", can you elaborate why document creator can't simulate the target output device on screen?

If the source image color gamut (say sRGB) is larger than the destined output color gamut (say fogra39L/51), gamut will be either chopped (absolute) or compressed (perceptual and relative compress in different way), context is in photoshop with ACE as the CMM. If I'm wrong, pls share w/ us what are the determinants for gamut compression.

On one hand, I agree customer's expectation is important, but there are also need for the industry to update customer what's available and thus customer can refine their expectation, for e.g. the evolving digital media are mostly high color gamut media.

Customer's expectation on key image consistency depends on what is the key media for that campaign, if digital is key, there are possibility for customer to look for a wider dynamic range/gamut visual for higher impact; while if print media is heavy they may go for the traditional way of limiting the key visual to gamut most print devices can handle.

IMO, client's expectation on color consistency – specification is getting more refined, for e.g. now CI/VI manual specify logo color in Pantone (both coated and uncoated), rgb, cmyk (coated, uncoated); client understood the Pantone logo can only be best revealed in media that bear such gamut, and understood it will be different in other less gamut media. So, I guess clients has realistic expectation on color consistency across media. And may be what they need is a re-tune of color expectation based on latest media/devices in particular the digital media.

The benefit of RGB workflow is to allow customer to have a choice to decide if they want to optimize their key images to the color gamut that media devices can handle, in a late binding way (thus effective), for maximum visual impact and marketing result.

IMO, color reproduction's responsibility is to reproduce the target color as close as possible within it's limit. In reality, the devices in different media bears different color capabilities, is it time to make refined categorization, based on media type, the different expectation of color from those media type?

 

[gordo]

You said "Just because the document creator is working in sRGB does not mean that what they see is what they will get.", can you elaborate why document creator can't simulate the target output device on screen?

A document creator can simulate the target output device on screen irrespective as to whether the image is sRGB, Adobe 1998, or CMYK. sRGB confers no special capabilities.

On one hand, I agree customer's expectation is important, but there are also need for the industry to update customer what's available and thus customer can refine their expectation, for e.g. the evolving digital media are mostly high color gamut media.

IMHO it's not up to "the industry" (whatever that is) to update a customer on what's available. It's up to the individual print services provider to to develop and market their capabilities to their prospective customers.

Customer's expectation on key image consistency depends on what is the key media for that campaign, if digital is key, there are possibility for customer to look for a wider dynamic range/gamut visual for higher impact; while if print media is heavy they may go for the traditional way of limiting the key visual to gamut most print devices can handle.

If the target media is digital - i.e. computer/tablet/smart phone displays then, while there may be a larger gamut than print media, there is unlikely to be any consistency in the appearance of the document.

IMO, client's expectation on color consistency – specification is getting more refined, for e.g. now CI/VI manual specify logo color in Pantone (both coated and uncoated), rgb, cmyk (coated, uncoated); client understood the Pantone logo can only be best revealed in media that bear such gamut, and understood it will be different in other less gamut media. So, I guess clients has realistic expectation on color consistency across media.

Based on what I've seen in the real world and postings to this forum and others...I doubt that's true for the majority of print buyers.

And may be what they need is a re-tune of color expectation based on latest media/devices in particular the digital media.

Again, it is the job of the supplier to set expectations for their performance.

The benefit of RGB workflow is to allow customer to have a choice to decide if they want to optimize their key images to the color gamut that media devices can handle, in a late binding way (thus effective), for maximum visual impact and marketing result.

I disagree. The benefit of an RGB workflow is that the imagery is not purposed until the output for a given project is defined. It is therefore more flexible. The RGB gamut is only potential. Specific images or documents may not see any benefit from the larger gamut. Gamut, visual impact, and marketing are separate entities. One does not follow from the other.

IMO, color reproduction's responsibility is to reproduce the target color as close as possible within it's limit. In reality, the devices in different media bears different color capabilities, is it time to make refined categorization, based on media type, the different expectation of color from those media type?

I would argue that the target color for printing is most typically a proof (which could be soft but is most often hard). Yes, different media will have different color capabilities, but again, it's the signed off proof that the supplier needs to reproduce. That proof sets the customer's expectation for reproduction performance. The proof encapsulates the capabilities of the different target media.

 

[gcplau]

Let me put it this way, in considering the marketing expenses in the real world with gradual increase for the new digital media, while declining for paper media, did Gordo make any study of:

1. how nowadays inkjet printers on photograde substrate can simulate sRGB for instance and the average/peak delta-E;
2. or have you compare the max color gamut of proofing grade inkjet as compare to old days c.print /r.print?
3. how digital printer like Indigo or others can simulate sRGB instead of CMYK?
4. how the smart phone and tab is displaying what colorspace and how close it can reveal sRGB like most of the computer display? will the smart phones honour icc-profiles in the display when you're view color managed docs?
5. how the wide and grandjet is improving it's color gamut for the indoor/outdoor signage or pop/posm? what are their gamut capabilities?

If you have an understanding about these, you will start to understand why I started this topic.

Having said that, I understand your experience and expertise in the CMYK world, but my topic is RGB; pls. try to be open and less defensive here.

 

[gordo]

Let me put it this way, in considering the marketing expenses in the real world with gradual increase for the new digital media, while declining for paper media, did Gordo make any study of:

1. how nowadays inkjet printers on photograde substrate can simulate sRGB for instance and the average/peak delta-E;
2. or have you compare the max color gamut of proofing grade inkjet as compare to old days c.print /r.print?
3. how digital printer like Indigo or others can simulate sRGB instead of CMYK?
4. how the smart phone and tab is displaying what colorspace and how close it can reveal sRGB like most of the computer display? will the smart phones honour icc-profiles in the display when you're view color managed docs?
5. how the wide and grandjet is improving it's color gamut for the indoor/outdoor signage or pop/posm? what are their gamut capabilities?

If you have an understanding about these, you will start to understand why I started this topic.

Having said that, I understand your experience and expertise in the CMYK world, but my topic is RGB; pls. try to be open and less defensive here.

I don't know anything about you since your profile is empty. I don't know if you're a vendor, a supplier or a creative, but in your original post you did write: "I invite you Gurus and Specialist to voice your opinion" and that is all I've done. That's not being defensive.

You appear to be stuck on sRGB and its gamut and how there's some kind of intrinsic value in digital devices that can simulate its gamut.

That's fine as far as it goes.

But you didn't deal with the points I raised - you just changed the topic and attacked me. So who's being defensive?

BTW, I've advocated for RGB workflows since the late-1980s and that's the workflow that I use.

 

[gcplau]

The name of "RGB Workflow" covers both RGB to CMYK and also RGB to RGB.

The objective of this topic is to explore the possibility, benefit/drawback of better use of the higher gamut devices. Since RGB is a late binding approach and pretty much, from theory to application, from concept to the real market situation, is RGB workflow or higher fidelity workflow the way to go? From customer to supplier...photography, creative, press to press; how can it implement it for flexibility, efficiency and quality?

Hope to hear your input.

 

[fiatlux]

@gcplau: Who are you? What business are you in?

 

[gcplau]

CMS consultancy and ex G7 expert...matters?

 

[Puch]

I would suggest studying the gamut of possible output processes' extensively before starting such initiative. sRGB is nowhere near an ideal RGB working space, even if the majority of (home use) stuff created in that color space. Eg., sRGB is too small to reproduce some areas of the FOGRA 39/51 gamut, and digital press / digital inkjet gamuts can be way larger than offset on coated stock.

That said, the so called RGB workflow is here and ready for more than ten years. Just import the original images into InDesign without any conversion, prepare a PDF/X-4 document, then push this stuff onto any properly configured modern RIP (utilizing APPE).

 

[gcplau]

Use AdobeRGB as source, how RGB workflow can flexibly and reliably repurpose output to device color space...from close to AdobeRGB such as the newer digital outputs, sRGB that we see on web and iDevices and CMYK. What and how prepress bridges design and printing (client and supplier).

So far, i find sRGB the prevailing display color space including computer, mobile bphone and pad, I know it's not the only media type and colorspace. U misunderstand here. And yes, 2D, 3D gamut comparison is everywhere in internet and my pmp. Am collecting lots of other device profile and comparing their gamut.