lpi & offset printing

pun_lavor

Member
Hi all,

I'm working in a mid-sized sheetfed offset printing house. In prepress we use CtP, pdf-preps-prinergy rip workflow. Since I haven't found anywhere on the forum I had to start a new thread for this one. :)
I would like to now which LPI are you using for different kinds of paper. Do you use the usual 85-133 for uncoated paper, 120-150 for coated paper, 150-300 for high quality offset, or you gained better results in printed materials with different LPI? Do you even change these settings before RIP and plate-making process according to the paper which will be used for the job, or do you keep some default LPI value for all jobs (if correct, which one?).

Thanks in advance.
 
Screening parameters like dot shape, frequency (lpi) and angles are dictated not only bypaper paper characteristics - ink absorbtion, but more important by the offset machine being used, press conditions and (less important) image composition in jobs. For instance, if your press conditions are pretty much standard and the offset machine is in good condition I would suggest 175 lpi for offset coated. Euclidian dot shape to begin with, as it yields a more controllable, predictable dot gain on press.
Always bear in mind that good communication between the prepress and the offset guys is crucial, now that your role has changed: you no longer produce film but plates and you will be responsible for the plate quality now, including all plate/image geometry and marks, raster uniformity across plate, even wearing in longer runs if applicable. Choose your RIP settings according to what your pressmen say as well. Start by calibrating and linearising your plate exposure for a test job at 175 (most people will say 200 is an overkill in most conditions), adjust your plate processing conditions properly then make a few tests and analyse the results. If everyone's happy with the result, don't change it.
 
With CtP, at 175 lpi, if you're using AM/XM screening use a round dot rather than a Euclidean or elliptical dot shape.
Use dot gain compensation on the plate rather than lpi to accommodate various substrates.

- gordo
 
Screening parameters like dot shape, frequency (lpi) and angles are dictated not only bypaper paper characteristics - ink absorbtion, but more important by the offset machine being used, press conditions and (less important) image composition in jobs. For instance, if your press conditions are pretty much standard and the offset machine is in good condition I would suggest 175 lpi for offset coated. Euclidian dot shape to begin with, as it yields a more controllable, predictable dot gain on press.
Always bear in mind that good communication between the prepress and the offset guys is crucial, now that your role has changed: you no longer produce film but plates and you will be responsible for the plate quality now, including all plate/image geometry and marks, raster uniformity across plate, even wearing in longer runs if applicable. Choose your RIP settings according to what your pressmen say as well. Start by calibrating and linearising your plate exposure for a test job at 175 (most people will say 200 is an overkill in most conditions), adjust your plate processing conditions properly then make a few tests and analyse the results. If everyone's happy with the result, don't change it.


Actually, at the moment we are using 170 lpi for all of our jobs; including coated, uncoated 90 - 350 g/m2 papers, conqueror papers etc. So I was wondering if the smaller LPI (<170) value for uncoated papes would make better results, as well would the higher LPI (>170) value make better results with coated papers.
 
There's definitely not a "one size fits all" solution to choosing print res. I would say yes, you should be using much lower than 170 for coarser stock.

And I don't think you should assume that higher is better, even on coated stock. There's a point of diminishing return, and everything becomes more fiddly at higher resolution, I guess.

I'm certainly not an expert, however.
 
You always need to take into account the relation between output resolution (dpi), screening frequency (lpi) and the number of gray levels that can be achieved!

number of gray levels = (ouput res / screen freq)² + 1

In a perfect world this value should be 256 or higher but in real life you should never go below 150.
If the number of gray levels drops too low then you will not be able to print a nice gradation from 0 to 100% without a banding effect.

This means at 2540 dpi you should not go higher than 200 lpi because (2540 / 200)² + 1 = 162,29 gray levels
If you output at 2400 dpi then the maximum is 175 lpi (189 gray levels).

If you would output 300 lpi at 2540 dpi then you can only have around 72 different gray levels.

Having said that, I would always output at the highest screening frequency that can be printed under normal conditions without problems to get the most detail in the printed result.
But in most cases you will have to use a different dot gain compenstation depending on the paper type.
 
Unless you are using a FM or hybrid raster.
We have been outputting with Agfa's Sublima 200 S2H2 raster, there is a noticable change in details in textiles from a 175 lpi raster. There are even higher rasters with this same technology, but this is where we find it most efficient as of today.
 
You always need to take into account the relation between output resolution (dpi), screening frequency (lpi) and the number of gray levels that can be achieved!

number of gray levels = (ouput res / screen freq)² + 1

In a perfect world this value should be 256 or higher but in real life you should never go below 150.
If the number of gray levels drops too low then you will not be able to print a nice gradation from 0 to 100% without a banding effect.

This means at 2540 dpi you should not go higher than 200 lpi because (2540 / 200)² + 1 = 162,29 gray levels
If you output at 2400 dpi then the maximum is 175 lpi (189 gray levels).

If you would output 300 lpi at 2540 dpi then you can only have around 72 different gray levels.

Having said that, I would always output at the highest screening frequency that can be printed under normal conditions without problems to get the most detail in the printed result.
But in most cases you will have to use a different dot gain compenstation depending on the paper type.

I remember this from the older days from Post script level 2 and earlier. I mentioned this to the trainers for G7 and they are telling me with the advent of Post script level 3 that the 256 shades of gray is obsolete. That with the newer rips that you can achieve thousands of shades of gray even with resolution as low as 2400 dpi. I would sure like to see information that collaborates this. I know we struggle with 175 line screens with our magnus and SM52. I think at higher then 2400 dpi we would have better results but I am a production guy and most of our prepress do not know these things.
 
The formula: "number of gray levels = (ouput res / screen freq)² + 1" is only true for a single halftone dot cell. However, we see dot areas not individual dots. In the early 1980s "super cell" screening was introduced. In simple terms, supercell screening gets around the lpi/dpi limitation. For example, if you cannot image a 12% dot (because of the lpi/dpi formula) but you can image an 11% and a 13% dot - then, an area of 11% and 13% dots will appear (and measure) as a 12% tone.
Since about 1989 or so, most manufacturers have introduced their implementation of supercell screening under different names (e.g. Kodak Maxtone Screening, Agfa – ABS, Screen – HPS, Fuji/Rampage – CoRes, Heidelberg – Highline, HQS, Harlequin – HPS, Artworks – Paragon).
Supercell screening is arguably the main type of AM screening in use since about 1990.

Here is a link to a good PDF on the subject:
www.globalgraphics.com/pdfs/products/hsl.pdf

best, gordo
 
Gordo thanks for the link. The link describes stochastic screening. Are you saying that super cell screening is different? If I run a 200 line screen at 2400 dpi will I get the same results as a 133 line screen at 2400dpi or will there be grays that I can not achieve if I am not using stochastic screening? We currently use 175 at 2400 but if you follow the formula we would need to go to like 3040 resolution to get all 256 shades of gray.
 
RGPW1700,

Here is a link to a Screening book that will describe all aspects of screening. One screening that was not mentioned is Irrational Screening, this is one step beyond Supercell Screening and hails back to the inventor of electronic screening, Dr. Hell. IS provides a level of accuracy that allows for true conventional angles. We do offer IS as our standard screening and Prinect Hybrid Screening and Prinect Stochastic Screening as options. Prinect Stochastic is a 2nd order and is smoother than a 1st order, however, even 2nd order stochastic has a tendency to look grainy is some flat tint area. This is not the case with Prinect Hybrid Screening (which is based on IS Screening) and you still obtain photorealistic results. The old formula for Postscript screening does not apply to this, we typically have over 1000 steps. Hope this helps.

Heidelberg - Download Center
 
Marktonk,

Thanks for the screening link. I was trying to avoid promoting a specific brand which is why I did not use a Kodak product reference. HD's IS screening in software, as you are aware is based on HQS screening, which is supercell technology. An earlier version of your guide puts it very well: From the Heidelberg "Expert Guide - An Introduction to Screening Technology" Section: 3.4.2 Modern IS Implementation" "The classic hardware IS algorithm cannot be processed quickly enough in software.This is why the software solution is based on completely different algorithms which are basically similar to the HQS process described earlier."

RGPW1700

I think I'm suffering a bit of jet lag (just got off a 16 hour flight from Australia)
I googled supercell screening to try and get you a fairly vendor neutral technical description - but didn't completely check the contents of the PDF. My bad.
I wasn't trying to promote stochastic/FM screening. What I was describing refers to conventional AM screening. The process to get around the gray level limitation suggested by the formula ("number of gray levels = (ouput res / screen freq)² + 1") is called "dithering". Most descriptions of supercell screening also talk about overcoming gray level limitations (which is why I went there in my original post).
Your question, if I understand it correctly, contains a common misconception.
A halftone dot is formed inside a halftone "cell" The cell is a grid of pixels which are turned on to form the dot. The cell begins with no pixels turned on (0% tone) and as pixels are turned on the dot grows until all the pixels within the cell are turned on and the cell is filled (i.e. 100% tone).
For example.
If the cell size is 2 pixels wide by 2 pixels deep the halftone cell will contain a total of 4 pixels. As a result the following halftone dot tone values can be created:
0% = all pixels off
25% = 1 pixel turned on
50% = 2 pixels turned on
75% = 3 pixels turned on
100% = 4 pixels turned on.

So, with a 2x2 pixel halftone cell it is only possible to have 5 tone levels (gray levels). I.e. the total number of tones possible equals the total number pixels available plus one. In this case 2x2=4 4+1 = 5.
If the number of pixels is increased within the cell by making them smaller - i.e. cell size remains the same but the pixels are smaller - then the number of possible gray levels goes up.
For example:
For a 10x10 cell the number of possible gray levels is 101 (10x10=100, 100+1=101)
For a 16x16 cell the number of possible gray levels is 257 (16x16=256, 257+1=257)
In a basic AM screen the dot is formed by turning on pixels starting from the center of the cell. (For a basic FM screen the pixels within the cell are turned on pseudo-randomly.)

So, as resolution increases - graylevels increases. As resolution decreases gray levels decrease.

If the resolution (dpi) is fixed but the number of adjacent cells is increased (i.e. lpi is increased) then the number of pixels available for each dot decreases and therefore the number of gray levels decreases.
This principle is captured by the classic formula: (dpi/lpi) squared + 1 = number of graylevels

Which is the formula you quoted.

So, for a 2400 dpi device:
2400 dpi/200 lpi = 12. 12 squared = 144. 144 plus one = only 145 tones possible. A problem.
And at 400 lpi
2400 dpi/400 lpi = 6. 6 squared = 36. 36 plus one = only 37 tones possible. A big problem.

However, the formula is only true for the tone represented by a single, isolated, halftone dot based on an individual halftone dot cell- something that never occurs in real production environments. Around 1989 a new approach began to be adopted. This approach is based on the fact that we don't care about individual halftone dots. What is important is the tone represented in an area. For example, we want to see a 17% tone patch value in the presswork. If we cannot represent that area with individual 17% dots because of that classic formula limitation we can still create the 17% value by alternating 16% dots and 18% dots (this is called "dithering"). The eye (and instruments) integrate the alternating 16% and 18% dots and the result is the average value - in this example 17% our desired tone value.
Supercell screening gets around the gray level limitations of the classic formula by looking at a tone area (the important criteria) rather than an individual dot. As a result, since about 1995 virtually all AM screens from all vendors adopted variants of supercell screening technology.
Most RIPs are normally shipped with this feature set to 1024 as this meets the tonal needs of the highest quality printers.
Users of systems that do not offer this functionality must resolve gray-level issues by increasing the addressability and resolution of the output device, limiting the screen ruling to a low lpi, or scaling the size and tonal gradation of problematic vignettes. These very high-resolution devices (e.g. 4000 dpi) are unnecessarily costly. Their high-resolution bitmaps are also larger, process more slowly, and impact throughput speed on the imaging device.
The optimal performance-to-quality ratio points to devices that operate in the range of around 2400 dpi. Systems using supercell screening technology to extend gray level generation offer all the resolution, all the screening, and all the throughput speed that most users will ever need. As a result, 2400 dpi has become the defacto standard for imaging resolution in the commercial print industry. Higher resolutions, as far as halftone screening is concerned, provides no additional value while imposing a penalty on imaging time.

The highest lpi on a 2400 dpi device that I'm aware of was 1694 lpi imaged on a Creo/Kodak CtP device in (I believe) 2000 by Metropolitan Fine Printers in Vancouver Canada which won a "They said it can't be done" award at GrapExpo in Chicago.

Where the various vendors distinguish themselves with their individual implementation of supercell screening is how they deal with issues such as rosette drift - the gradual shift from clear centered rosette to dot centered rosette - over the width of the plate, single channel moiré, miniscus effects as dots first touch, e.g. at the 50% point, and other nuances of halftone screening.

Hope this helps. Best, gordo
 
Hi Gordo,

Soft IS is based on a cross between HQS and IS, please read the whole paragraph of "3.5.2 Modern IS Implementation in
Software". At the end it states :

"This method provides a level of precision comparable to that of the hardware method and better than a device pixel."

The hardware method being referred to hardware IS Screening. Although Soft IS is similar to HQS, it has the precision comparable to Hardware IS.

You are correct that the old Postscript formula is not applicable with modern, 12 bit screening in referencing gray scale steps. I think we are all glad for that.


Regards,
 
Gordo I want to thank you for taking the time to explain the dithering and how the super cell screening works. I read you explanation once and feel I understand what you are saying. I will be sending this link to my Prepress people. I stumbled across this site a week ago and am so impressed with it. Thank you.
 

PressWise

A 30-day Fix for Managed Chaos

As any print professional knows, printing can be managed chaos. Software that solves multiple problems and provides measurable and monetizable value has a direct impact on the bottom-line.

“We reduced order entry costs by about 40%.” Significant savings in a shop that turns about 500 jobs a month.


Learn how…….

   
Back
Top