Profiling V/s standardization

[pacificiam]

Hi,

Many of people have concept that Profiling and standardization is same thing.

Can you help me distinguish between this 2 concept.
and also let me know the procedure for it.

Please do the needful

[gordo]

Hi,

Many of people have concept that Profiling and standardization is same thing.

Can you help me distinguish between this 2 concept.
and also let me know the procedure for it.

Please do the needful

Profiling is taking a snapshop of an existing condition.
Standardization is defining a target and a tolerance for deviation.

best, gordo

[pacificiam]

It is very short and sweet answer....

Can you give you explanation as you had given to my other question

[gordo]

It is very short and sweet answer....

Can you give you explanation as you had given to my other question

I don't understand your question. Can you restate it using different words?

[pacificiam]

Dear Sir,

Can you elaborate proofing concept and Standardization.

It means what profiling exactly doing? how it give us snapshot of condition? What element include while profiling.

My Sr. telling creating dot gain curve is profiling. But I dont think it include only TVI curve

[gordo]

Dear Sir,

Can you elaborate proofing concept and Standardization.

It means what profiling exactly doing? how it give us snapshot of condition? What element include while profiling.

My Sr. telling creating dot gain curve is profiling. But I dont think it include only TVI curve

OK, this is my opinion. Others may disagree.

I try to take an economic view of things.

So, profiling and standards are related to economic impact.
You can print however you want and tolerate any variation that occurs so long as there is no economic impact. If, for example, you're a magazine printer and your solid ink densities vary 30 points over or below industry standards or your registration is out by 1/8th inch - that's OK as long as your advertisers don't complain and ask for a discount, or charge back, on their ads. If they complain then there is a cost. If there is a cost for failure to comply then there is a reason to define a standard (target) and tolerance for deviation.
For example, I was at a newspaper printer today and one of their car advertisers complained about the misregistration of their ad making the cars they were advertising look bad. The cost to the newspaper publisher making good on that complaint is $1600. If that problem occurs 10 times then that's $16,000 in costs (or reduced profitability) to the newspaper. That cost might be a good enough reason to the newspaper to establish a standard target and tolerance for misregistration. Why? Because failure results in costs and reduced profitability.
If, to use your example, dot gain variation results in increased production costs or reduced profitability then it would be a metric that you would apply a target and tolerance for deviation to. If it doesn't result in increased production costs or reduced profitability then you can ignore it.
In my experience, data based on cost and profitability is the only thing that convinces management to invest in making changes to the production process.

best, gordo

[pacificiam]

Not understood...

[Greg_Firestone]

Standardization = getting repeatable results. The results don't have to be accurate. The important part is that they are consistent and reproducible. On a digital printer or plate setter, this could be running a calibration process recommended by the manufacturer.

Profiling = Once you have predictable results, you take it a step further to have accurate results. This is where profiling comes into play. You output a file with known values and use a measuring device to compare the original versus the output results. Software then creates a profile which helps you helps map the colors so the output is a more accurate match to the source.

(That's the short version)

Greg

[meddington]

Standardization = getting repeatable results. The results don't have to be accurate. The important part is that they are consistent and reproducible. On a digital printer or plate setter, this could be running a calibration process recommended by the manufacturer.

Hi Greg. I would personally characterize your description as fingerprinting rather than standardization. Where there is a standard, as Gordo pointed out, there is typically a target to aim toward, and tolerances for deviation as specified by a standardization body (ISO for instance). So accuracy may matter. Fingerprinting may or may not involve aiming towards a standard. However, I don't think adding "fingerprinting" is going to lessen the confusion of the OP.

[gordo]

Not understood...

I think I went off on a tangent. I had just returned from a newspaper publisher where everything was done by eye and there were no standards. I was trying to give them the tools they needed to rationalize the investment into getting the right tools to management.

Apologies. gordo