New Product for Ink Optimization

[kenthekid]

Has anyone heard of or used a new product from "Chromaticity" that is a new ink optimamizer program?
If I'm correct it's called "ice"? From what i've been told, it's something like "Alwan". Apparently it is in the
stage of being newly rolloed out in the next few months. The boast is that not only does it optimize ink
but widens/increases color gamut. Just wondering if anyone has heard of this product or is currently using it.
Thanx.......

 

[gordo]

There was some discussion about it here:

http://printplanet.com/forums/color-management/14247-ink-saving-solution

best, gordon p

my print blog here: Quality In Print

 

[kenthekid]

Ink Savings

Ink Savings

Gordo:
Thanx for the comeback, by the way, with you're background with Kodak, what's your take on Kodak's
ColorFlow? I believe it's called? I think that's the product name for Kodak's ink optimization program.
Any thoughts??

 

[gordo]

Gordo:
Thanx for the comeback, by the way, with you're background with Kodak, what's your take on Kodak's
ColorFlow? I believe it's called? I think that's the product name for Kodak's ink optimization program.
Any thoughts??

Errr, well, uh, hmmm. I'm no longer with Kodak, however, keep in mind that I am not as completely free to speak as someone who has not worked for the company can - especially since I was the regional marketing manager for those products.
Someone from Kodak might want to correct anything I write below. Their website on these topics haven't been updated since May of last year.
Kodak's ink optimization program is incorporated within ColorFlow, however ColorFlow is a much broader application.
AFAIK, their ink optimizing capability is still in beta, it's a "basic" device link profile used within Prinergy. Because it's still in beta, the services (or lack thereof) around it as well as implementation procedures have likely not been finalized. I don't believe any samples that would show its capability have been released.
ColorFlow software delivers Color Relationship Management. It unifies color elements (ICC profiles, curves, and spot color recipes), managing the relationship between them and the device print conditions. It's a great approach to the problem of managing color in the print manufacturing process - at least once its left the creative's desk. It was tremendously received at the Kodak Users Conference in 2008. I think (hope) you'll see more vendors coming out with similar solutions. If they don't - shame on them.
AFAIK - ColorFlow was to be released with Prinergy 5 or 5.01/5.1 ... this spring/summer timeframe...hopefully by Print '09 in Sept.

I did an 8-part blog on the topic of ink savings solutions which you (and others) might find useful in evaluating various vendor offering (including K). I had a different ink saver vendor check and edit my posts before they were published to help ensure that any possible accidental Kodak bias was eliminated.
The first part is here:
Quality In Print: GCR Reseparation for ink savings and color stability in offset printing - part 1 of 8

best, gordon p

 

[edwinb]

there's a comprehensive set of notes with an example print you can view from the gmg ink optimiser and they also make claims on color matching, another significate ink optimiser is made by Alwan
edwin

 

[Louis Dery]

there's a comprehensive set of notes with an example print you can view from the gmg ink optimiser and they also make claims on color matching, another significate ink optimiser is made by Alwan
edwin

And another significate ink optimization through device link profile creation is made by TGLC and is called PerfX Device Link Proâ„¢.

Louis

 

[tmiller_iluvprinting]

I believe the ICE products are offered by a company named FineEye. ICE stands for Intelligent Color Engine, and there are three products offered: ICEsaver, ICEsaver Server and ICEmaker. Saver is the ink and press optimization app. Maker is the RGB-CMYK conversion app. You can request free trials: FineEye -- Request Download
Extremely interesting theory, PCR-Programmed Color Reformulation used in ICEsaver. ICEmaker's 3:2 gamut compression is very interesting also. I have requested a free version of ICEmaker.
Best regards,
Todd

 

[Ian Mackenzie]

to clarify....

to clarify....

The product, ICEsaver, is made by a company called Fine Eye Color in Mountain View, CA.
It is sold and distributed in North America by Chromaticity.

Todd is correct, there are 3 products. However, it is our understanding that ICEmaker - an RGB>CMYK conversion utility - will not be available until the fall.

The core product, the ICEsaver server, is shipping now and has been received well by the initial customers. It will be formally launched at the IPA Tech Conference in Chicago on June 8th. Yes, it does extend the gamut of offset printing. It is very cool to see the results. It is also very cool to see the comparison between a GRACoL press sheet and then an "ICEd" sheet of the same images.

Ink savings are certainly an added bonus here.
When you combine a 20% wider gamut with ink savings that are "more aggressive" than many of the GCR-based solutions, you may see a product like this "get legs" in the market.
It's also extremely easy to install, train and use.

 

[meddington]

We recently did a trial of ICEsaver. It was presented to us as a "differentiator" rather than a "GCR" or typical ink saver product, though it does a fine job at that. The visual results from our initial press trial were actually quite good. From the claims that Ian has made I can confirm that we noticed significant gamut gains (printing toward their recommended densities) while protecting tonality, gray balance and fleshtones. The color was boosted where you would want it, but not at the cost of sacrificing other tones. Contrast and "depth of field" were improved. The images "popped" if you will, and yes, with less ink.

How much bread you actually save on ink depends on a few things. the amount of coverage on the form, the total print quantity, the cost difference between black ink compared to CMY, and your current separation techniques. Ink savings would be less when converting heavy GCR files through ICE than if you're using little or moderate GCR. So if you're using heavy GCR and you black ink costs are fairly well nested to CMY, the inks savings won't be nearly as compelling, though still present. The above would be applicable to any solution really.

The software is indeed very easy to use and required little training, and its easy to like the results...more gamut & ink savings. Our pressman was happy with how the separations printed...easily coming up to density, where he expected to fight with it a bit, particularly with FM screening, though more press trials are needed here. Some caveats are that custom profiling is done third party. There's the possibility that the high gamut printed results could exceed the visual appearance of the original RGB photo. Not saying the ICE gamut exceeds AdobeRGB or anything, just that a typical photo might be readily achieved in a colorspace like GracolCoated, but appear punchier on press via ICE...could be an issue for critical color matching where the assumption is the RGB image is color accurate.

We'll put it through some more hoops here and see how it jives on live work.

 

[Deleted member 16349]

From the claims that Ian has made I can confirm that we noticed significant gamut gains (printing toward their recommended densities) while protecting tonality, gray balance and fleshtones.

Interesting results. Thanks for providing them.

Can you comment on what their recommended densities are?

I am still curious about how they can obtain gamut gains and knowing their density targets would help.

Thanks.

Erik

 

[gordo]

meddington, have you profiled the gamut. If so, could you share it. I'd love to compare with GRACoL.

thx, gordon p

my print blog here: Quality In Print current video post: Platemaking at the Chicago Tribune - 1937

 

[meddington]

Interesting results. Thanks for providing them.

Can you comment on what their recommended densities are?

I am still curious about how they can obtain gamut gains and knowing their density targets would help.

Thanks.

Erik

Let me qualify the term "gamut gains". Analysis thus far is purely visual, and I haven't plotted anything yet to determine any increae in gamut...just perceived.

Recommended densities for our paper/ink were C1.60, M1.70, Y1.15, K1.80

 

[gordo]

Recommended densities for our paper/ink were C1.60, M1.70, Y1.15, K1.80

Wouldn't the increased SIDs account for increased gamut?

thx, gordon p

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Wouldn't the increased SIDs account for increased gamut?

thx, gordon p

I would think that was the main cause for an increase in gamut but I am still curious to know if there is any other issues here.

It looks like running with the above densities is out of normal Standard values but that is OK.
I am very much against industry standards that are not really aimed at a general approach to colour reproduction but are more aimed at trying to have everything the same. Paper, ink TVI etc.

If some standardized method only works well if every component is limited to the same or like set of components, then it is kind of stupid in my mind. Standardization sounds like a good thing but it has to make sense. Standardize the results and not the method.

A good standard for the printing industry would be something like saying that a printed image has to be within +/- Delta E 3.0 of the target colour at every point in the image. Who cares how you make the image as long as you can meet the specified tolerance.

I think running at higher densities is a good idea for some kinds of work. I think the technology should be developed so that one can run at different densities or with different paper or screens and still have predictable results. And I don't mean predictable just in the gray scale as with G7 but anywhere in the image.

 

[meddington]

Wouldn't the increased SIDs account for increased gamut?

thx, gordon p

Absolutlet. I just meant that I hadn't had a chance to measure any targets yet to numerically compare towards another gamut, such as gracol. Ill post when I do.

Caveat. The it874 target was processed along side all other live content thru the ICE server. As such it wouldn't be a totally fair direct comparison toward an unprocessed it874 thru gracol coated.

 

[Louis Dery]

Wouldn't the increased SIDs account for increased gamut?

thx, gordon p

I think so.
How a conversion would make red (extend gamut) other than 100 M and 100 Y?

Louis

 

[gordo]

To Meddington and Ian,

My concern is that the increase in SIDs has not been mentioned before. Instead, by not mentioning the SIDs, what is being implied is that the ink savings application itself provides a "20% increase in gamut" while reducing the amount of ink being used.
It would have been more useful to see if there was an increase i gamut, as claimed, when SIDs are the same for processed and unprocessed files. Because at the same SIDs, I doubt that there would be any increase in gamut.

best gordon p
my print blog here: Quality In Print

 

[marktonk]

Gordo has some good points. It would be interesting to see what would be obtained using the same SIDS as a standard run for a direct comparison.

Regards,

Mark

 

[Louis Dery]

Agree with Gordo and Mark,

Increasing color gamut by 20% without changing ink densities…… if it is possible to make a printer to print a wider gamut without changing the print characteristics (ink density, paper, etc.), I would like to see this!

Louis

 

[meddington]

Honestly guys, it never occurred to me that the increase in gamut could be the result of anything other than the increase in density. I mean, all else equal 'cept the seps, what would it be if not density, though perhaps the separations facilitate the ability to push densities higher. I think you may be pouncing on an inadvertant(though important) ommision from these posts. To be fair, the guys at chromaticity were up front about this to me from the get go.