Generic SWOP profile or press profile?

[Chrissy]

We have 3 sheetfed presses and 1 web press. My question is when setting up our proofers should I use a generic profile to be in line with industry standards or make my own profile to match each press?

 

[disbellj]

Re: Generic SWOP profile or press profile?

You need a custom proofer profile to get best color, and can use a standards-based profile for the press simulation.

In your proofing rip, you'd set the standard/specification profile for the type of paper you're actually going to be printing the final job on (such as GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 in U.S., or ISOcoatedv2 in Europe, if printing on #1 gloss coated stock or #2 matte stock, and ISOuncoated if printing on #4 uncoated stock, and for paper types # 3 & 5 there are new profiles SWOP2006_Coated3v2 and SWOP2006_Coated5v2) as source in your proofing rip (this is the final output you want to match on your proof). Then you would set your destination profile (where the job is actually getting sent to right now, in this case your proofer) in your proofing rip to your proofer's custom profile.

I have two proofers, and one I use Absolute Colorimetric Intent to get the best match (quality proof on Epson 7600), but I have an older imposition proofer with different paper and inks (Sherpa2) that I must use Relative Colorimetric Intent to not get visible dots on paper that I don't want (this proofer doesn't have as many nozzles or as small droplets as the Epson 7600). When I use GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 for proofing on the proofers, there is not much difference at all no matter whether using Relative Colorimetric or Absolute Colorimetric (although if you have small enough droplets you should use Absolute Colorimetric Intent, as long as you don't get visible dots on paper where paper is simulated).

The presses would be set up via G7 method if in U.S., or by TVI method if in Europe. Once presses set up to the standard, the standard profiles can be used for proofing. The plates may be different for the different presses. Some may have different inherent dot gain so one may need a different set of curves than another one to get to the standard.

BTW, the official GRACoL2006 and SWOP 2006 profiles are freely downloadable from www.gracol.org. The ISOcoatedv2 and ISOuncoated profiles are freely downloadable from www.eci.org. As we all got on the same page, things get easier for us all.

Don

 

[RiotMac]

Re: Generic SWOP profile or press profile?

We use the generic US Web Coated SWOP ICC profile on most of our proofing jobs. All run with relative colormetric. We can run Absolute to simulate paper tint. We also have a cusom G7 profile setup for our G7 jobs.

 

[disbellj]

Re: Generic SWOP profile or press profile?

On my Sherpa2, since I couldn't use my custom press profile I made on DuPont CromaPro XP because it just wouldn't work when using it as source for this proofer, I too still do (for most customers) use U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2 with Relative Colorimetric Intent just like Brad does. My proofs match each other pretty well. But I'll tell you, when I use the official GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 profile as source for both proofers, the match couldn't get much if any better than that between proofs. That's why I'd like to move right now to GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (can use this profile for more purposes than my custom profile I built because the profile I built was obviously meant for using on only that proofing rip that I made it with, where I can use the official profile for all purposes, and the official profile is very smooth). Just wish my boss and Pitman would make the decisions on what to get here, because for the life of me I can't. I just know how to use what I got, and find ways to use stuff in ways they weren't meant to be used. Oh well, it all works out eventually. I can tell you this though. I do have a working GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 workflow and do use it for some customers, and have used it to fix banding that is inheent in our custom profile/plates setup we made years ago.

Don