Matching proof to customer supplied proof

[saint]

I have a client who has an in-house "color consultant". We supplied the client a proof that matches our press output (Komori 40inch press). The "color consultant" rejected the proof stating that our colors were "crappy". After multiple conversations with the "color consultant" I determined that they are not using proofing rip software (Oris, GMG, Caldera etc) but rather they are printing pdf's straight from Adobe Acrobat to the epson device. When I bypass my proofing rip (print to the epson from acrobat) I can achieve the same results as their supplied proof. I have spent the last day Linerizing, Calibrating, Profiling Media and creating ICC profiles. None of my proofs can replicate the Clients supplied proof.

What now? How do I tell the client that their proof is not accurate? I had another shop output the same file and their result was the same as mine.

 

[kennycu]

I would think that you are bypassing your press simulation and printing the full gamut of the Epson printer. Ask their consultant what specs his output simulates and how he verifies it.

 

[Stephen Marsh]

How do I tell the client that their proof is not accurate?

Your print is not accurate, it is not a proof. :]

This is why most commercia/generall printers don’t accept client supplied “proofs” or only use them for colour relationship reference – their proof is the contract.


Stephen Marsh

 

[saint]

Thank you both but how do I nicely explain to someone that they do not know what they are talking about? That the world of offset printing can not hit the same colors that a 10 color Epson proof can hit and that is why we use a rip to dumb down the colors to match a 4 color offset?

 

[Stephen Marsh]

Saint, you keep saying what needs to be said – you can’t make the truth “nice”, but you can say it nicely.


Stephen Marsh

 

[David Milisock]

Maybe this is a client your company should consider as a non-starter

 

[saint]

Maybe this is a client your company should consider as a non-starter

Normally I would agree but this has been a wonderful client up until yesterday. The client is great, the new color consultant, not so much.

 

[kennycu]

Asking the consultant those questions I proposed is a nice way to have him come up with the reason for his client. I think we know the problem but it would be "nice" to have the consultant submit the answer.

 

[gordo]

I have a client who has an in-house "color consultant". We supplied the client a proof that matches our press output (Komori 40inch press). The "color consultant" rejected the proof stating that our colors were "crappy". After multiple conversations with the "color consultant" I determined that they are not using proofing rip software (Oris, GMG, Caldera etc) but rather they are printing pdf's straight from Adobe Acrobat to the epson device. When I bypass my proofing rip (print to the epson from acrobat) I can achieve the same results as their supplied proof. I have spent the last day Linerizing, Calibrating, Profiling Media and creating ICC profiles. None of my proofs can replicate the Clients supplied proof.

What now? How do I tell the client that their proof is not accurate? I had another shop output the same file and their result was the same as mine.

I agree with kennycu's comments. Try and have the color consultant connect the dots on your behalf.

The key points to keep in mind are:

1 - There are common international print standards and specifications that the majority of printers - and you - adhere to (ISO 12647-2).
2 - Your proofer is aligned to those print standards and specifications
3 - Your press is aligned to print to those print standards and specifications as represented by your proof
4 - Your proof reflects how the client files will appear on press when printed to those common international print standards and specifications
5 - If the document creator and color consultant align their proofer to the common international print standards and specifications then there proof will align with your proof and presswork.

This assumes that your proof indeed is set up to represent a standard like ISO 12647-2 and not to your presswork as you unfortunately put it ("We supplied the client a proof that matches our press output") If indeed you've set up your proofer to your press then you could offer the consultant the profile that he could use to set up his client's proofer to simulate your unique print condition.

 

[mastegman]

You could always offer to print their job on an EPSON printer to get the same colours they are getting. Just explain to them that they'll have to wait until after Xmas if they want a run of 10,000 or more . You could add a revised quote as well.

 

[Bill W]

If you are printing to ISO 12647-2, then maybe a picture might help. I have attached a picture of the GRACoL 2006 profile, the smaller one, against the almost full gamut of an Epson 4880 or 4900 using orange and green inks.

-Bill-

 

[dabob]

Normally I would agree but this has been a wonderful client up until yesterday. The client is great, the new color consultant, not so much.

If the client and you have had a long successful relationship and the "consultant" is new and is the fly in the ointment perhaps you should reach out to a senior person at the company that you know and have a chat about expectations and how the new color consultant doesn't seem to understand the limitations of the CMYK printing process.

 

[David Milisock]

I would suggest communication with your rep that has managed the account, ask if there's been issues in terms of color with your delivered product is so then the direction is certainly one of question and answer to see what they've been disappointed with. If not then the communication starts with what direction are you looking to go and how can we improve? Either way look and see if you've been delivering on press what's been shown on proof.

 

[akalaray]

Well at least the consultant was nice? The "color consultant" rejected the proof stating that our colors were "crappy".

 

[StillWaiting]

Well at least the consultant was nice? The "color consultant" rejected the proof stating that our colors were "crappy".

Don't understand your post?

 

[bean66]

I agree with Dabob, you should contact the customer and open a dialog with them. We have had customers that do the same and we have made color changes to the file so that our proof looks like thiers. We charge them of course.

 

[slush11]

YOu could always have the "consultant" come in and see for themselves what all is involved. If not, then write him/her a 3 page long detailed description of the process and the stuff that gordo listed. They will probably get bored after the first few sentences since they likely don't have a clue or want to have a clue about any of it. Then hopefully they will just say "OK, you win". LOL

 

[saint]

you could offer the consultant the profile that he could use to set up his client's proofer to simulate your unique print condition.

If the client does not have proofing software (RIP) how would they utilize the ICC profile?

 

[mwc]

If the client does not have proofing software (RIP) how would they utilize the ICC profile?

Ask them how they can verify (to you) that the proof they are making is managed and consistent?
<snark> You could ask them to take a picture of the file on their screen for you to match, you will have the same 'success' matching that as you would a customer supplied (a non-certified/measured/controlled proof)....</snark>
If they can't supply you with a proof that has a color strip that you can verify (to your own or to an industry standard) then you are just running in circles...

 

[Stephen Marsh]

If the client does not have proofing software (RIP) how would they utilize the ICC profile?

One does not need a proofing RIP, they can convert to and use the profile in their authoring software and or Acrobat Pro etc.

Two images attached (each 2up), one of colour bars and one of some images.

In each case, one image was proofed via a RIP, the other through Acrobat Reader and the Epson printer driver using a PDF/X file and Epson driver colour settings and driver profiles for the same media used by the RIP which used different profiles and settings for the same media (Epson Standard Proofing Paper 240). As Epson printer driver requires OEM media for accurate out of the box results, I proofed on this same media so that it would be an apples to apples test. In each case, it was attempted to create the “best” proof of Fogra39.

They are not exactly the same, however one is not totally different than the other, they are closer together than further apart – unlike the situation described in the OP where the non RIP print was very saturated and vibrant and not at all like a press simulation. Note that the scanner has exaggerated the differences more so than when viewing the prints.

One set of prints pass Fogra39 verification with a spectro, the other does not.

My point being that visually, if one does things correctly – one can get “visually quite close” to the results of a calibrated and profiled proofing solution (close but no cigar, the RIP wins hands down on many points).


Stephen Marsh