One CMYK-profile to rule them all?

[Magnus]

This might not be interesting for people in the US but...

...a few weeks ago ECI (European Color Inititive) together with Fogra and GMG released a new icc-profile based on Fogra 53 - the eciCMYK.icc.

http://www.eci.org/en/colourstandards/workingcolorspaces

https://www.fogra.org/en/fogra-rese...hange-space-fogra53-and-ecicmyk-released.html

The idea seems to be 'One CMYK-profile to rule them all' or as ECI and Fogra calls it CMYK Exchange Colorspace. The wide gamut of the new profile covers all common CMYK-profiles and ISO-standards and got a white point of L 96,5 a 1 b -3 and a max black point that is about L 5 a 0 b 2.

I think that this might be very good for designers and big companies who buys a lot of print with multible print techniques. In theory they can deliver one single file for multiple purpose (and maybe even approve one single hard proof). The conversion to the destination printing condition would be preformed in the RIP (or in a prior step like preflight), but the designer doesn't need to care... If I understand the idea properly.

What is your input regarding this? Ups and downs? Do you think this will be adopted as a 'de facto standard' in the future? Or will it fade out like the eciRGB project?

Keen to hear what you guys think!

Best regards,
Magnus

 

[arossetti]

What can this do that a RGB profile cannot? I'm assuming the traditional litho printer will still convert this to Fogra51 before separating.

Not trying to be a jerk, I'm seriously wondering what the advantages of a large gamut CMYK profile is over a RGB profile since both of them do not describe the actual printer capabilities.

 

[gordo]

Pardon my ignorance in this matter. Shouldn't there be a standard print characteristic that is the aim point for printers and buyers of the different main media types? Then, shouldn't the profiles be used to bring the artwork into alignment with the target print characteristic? At least for those printer/clients who want to conform to a standard print characteristic.

 

[Magnus]

What can this do that a RGB profile cannot? I'm assuming the traditional litho printer will still convert this to Fogra51 before separating.

Not trying to be a jerk, I'm seriously wondering what the advantages of a large gamut CMYK profile is over a RGB profile since both of them do not describe the actual printer capabilities.

I'm guessing you meant to say "before printing"? I'm also wondering what the advantage are, thats why I created this post. I'm not sold yet.

Fogra says: "The advantage of using a CMYK-based exchange colour space is that the complete design takes place in a single colour space. Colour communication with the client is based on the approval of one single contract – in contrast to the preparation of dedicated CMYK separations and corresponding proofs.Starting from FOGRA53 colour managed and approved artwork, print data will be converted into the pertinent printing conditions."

And ECI says: "The advantage of using a CMYK exchange color space is to design in a single color space. A single proof print serves for the color communication with the print buyer – in contrast to separate data sets and proof prints on a per printing condition or paper type basis. As soon as the client approves the color quality, all necessary color conversions to specific printing conditions can be done starting from eciCMYK."

Fogra also says in a PDF from 2014 regarding Fogra53: "Advantage of using a large gamut exchange space, details in shadows and deep blacks stay visible (like with BPC), e.g. when converting RGB > exchange space > FOGRA39 instead of direct conversion RGB > Fogra39"

Best regards,
Magnus

 

[Deleted member 16349]

This might not be interesting for people in the US but...

...a few weeks ago ECI (European Color Inititive) together with Fogra and GMG released a new icc-profile based on Fogra 53 - the eciCMYK.icc.

http://www.eci.org/en/colourstandards/workingcolorspaces

https://www.fogra.org/en/fogra-rese...hange-space-fogra53-and-ecicmyk-released.html

The idea seems to be 'One CMYK-profile to rule them all' or as ECI and Fogra calls it CMYK Exchange Colorspace. The wide gamut of the new profile covers all common CMYK-profiles and ISO-standards and got a white point of L 96,5 a 1 b -3 and a max black point that is about L 5 a 0 b 2.

I think that this might be very good for designers and big companies who buys a lot of print with multible print techniques. In theory they can deliver one single file for multiple purpose (and maybe even approve one single hard proof). The conversion to the destination printing condition would be preformed in the RIP (or in a prior step like preflight), but the designer doesn't need to care... If I understand the idea properly.

What is your input regarding this? Ups and downs? Do you think this will be adopted as a 'de facto standard' in the future? Or will it fade out like the eciRGB project?

Keen to hear what you guys think!

Best regards,
Magnus

I strongly suspect it is the wrong approach. Any concept that uses and depends on; conversion of colour spaces, graphic standards, non custom profiles, tone curves, Lab targets for inks, image files that are not using device independent values of colour, G7, etc., will not result in predictable results. IMO.

Because inks, paper, press design are different, one needs some kind of custom profile. The present method to make a custom ICC profile is probably not good enough due to the limited number of measurements used but it seems that even with this limitation, a custom ICC profile is probably much better than a generic profile. With offset there is the issue that the print around the plate cylinder can be different for the same combination of CMYK screen values due to variation in the application of ink to the plate. Therefore the existing offset process (except Heidelberg's Anicolor press) does not have a specific print characterization.

The industry does not want to face reality. It wants to believe in magic. It thinks it can magically solve problems with software without addressing fundamental physical problems and faulty logic.

To solve this general problem, the print output devices need to be redesigned or modified to provide consistency, repeatability and predictability. But there is always an excuse not to do this.

The files describing points in an image should be in a form that uses device independent colour values and also values that can be scaled. Lab is a device independent colour value but it can not be scaled accurately.

For research purposes, it would not be too hard to do some simple and low cost experimental tests to study what kind of system would result in a clear method to deal with this problem of colour management without the mess that has developed over the years.

Also what is needed is a fast and simple technology to measure thousands of patches that would describe a custom profile. I knew this would be a requirement about 15 years ago and only recently a technology has come on the market that claims it can do it. The Rapid Spectro Cube (RSC) by ColorGate claims to be able to measure up to 10,000 patches at once for ICC profiles. I don't know how capable this product is but this kind of technology that can measure large numbers of patches quickly and easily, is critical for the development of custom profiles in a very easy and low cost way.

 

[Puch]

This is something I already evangelize in my circles for some time: the "FOGRA 39" for everything. The new color space might slightly be better.

I had an impression that no matter how clear guides you write, how complete 'helper packages' you provide (including profiles, .joboptions files, naming conventions, upload links etc.) the rapid decrease in 'craftmanship' and general everyday skills deny the whole point of 'enduser colormanagement'. We investigated two options: the PDF/X-4 path and the PDF/x-1a path.

PDF/X-4 offers a very elegant and easy solution for most of the problems, but the normalized, flattened print-ready pages must be approved online, what the customer will avoid at all costs. Therefore nowadays we stick with the PDF/X-1a way, normalized to FOGRA 39 at the point of creation. That means the 'ruining of color & graphics' happens at the customers' domain, so most of the responsibility is theirs. Afterwards we Device Link convert everything to the actual production color space. We only look for approval (on printed proofs) when the output is way off FOGRA 39, like MFC paper, newspaper etc.

Regarding the proposed new standard I believe it will gain ground only if it offers significant advantages over existing FOGRA 39. The paper white with the 'new normal' bluish tint might be a reason, if we're to print proofs onto OBA enabled papers (which we will do in the near future).

 

[Magnus]

This is something I already evangelize in my circles for some time: the "FOGRA 39" for everything. The new color space might slightly be better.

I had an impression that no matter how clear guides you write, how complete 'helper packages' you provide (including profiles, .joboptions files, naming conventions, upload links etc.) the rapid decrease in 'craftmanship' and general everyday skills deny the whole point of 'enduser colormanagement'. We investigated two options: the PDF/X-4 path and the PDF/x-1a path.

PDF/X-4 offers a very elegant and easy solution for most of the problems, but the normalized, flattened print-ready pages must be approved online, what the customer will avoid at all costs. Therefore nowadays we stick with the PDF/X-1a way, normalized to FOGRA 39 at the point of creation. That means the 'ruining of color & graphics' happens at the customers' domain, so most of the responsibility is theirs. Afterwards we Device Link convert everything to the actual production color space. We only look for approval (on printed proofs) when the output is way off FOGRA 39, like MFC paper, newspaper etc.

Regarding the proposed new standard I believe it will gain ground only if it offers significant advantages over existing FOGRA 39. The paper white with the 'new normal' bluish tint might be a reason, if we're to print proofs onto OBA enabled papers (which we will do in the near future).

FOGRA39 is already replaced by FOGRA51.

But the approach you are using with one single CMYK-profile towards your customers is the same (I think) as how ECI and Fogra would like FOGRA53 to be used. Make it easier for the designer/print buyer but a little bit harder for the printer.

 

[Magnus]

I strongly suspect it is the wrong approach. Any concept that uses and depends on; conversion of colour spaces, graphic standards, non custom profiles, tone curves, Lab targets for inks, image files that are not using device independent values of colour, G7, etc., will not result in predictable results. IMO.

Because inks, paper, press design are different, one needs some kind of custom profile. The present method to make a custom ICC profile is probably not good enough due to the limited number of measurements used but it seems that even with this limitation, a custom ICC profile is probably much better than a generic profile. With offset there is the issue that the print around the plate cylinder can be different for the same combination of CMYK screen values due to variation in the application of ink to the plate. Therefore the existing offset process (except Heidelberg's Anicolor press) does not have a specific print characterization.

The industry does not want to face reality. It wants to believe in magic. It thinks it can magically solve problems with software without addressing fundamental physical problems and faulty logic.

To solve this general problem, the print output devices need to be redesigned or modified to provide consistency, repeatability and predictability. But there is always an excuse not to do this.

The files describing points in an image should be in a form that uses device independent colour values and also values that can be scaled. Lab is a device independent colour value but it can not be scaled accurately.

For research purposes, it would not be too hard to do some simple and low cost experimental tests to study what kind of system would result in a clear method to deal with this problem of colour management without the mess that has developed over the years.

Also what is needed is a fast and simple technology to measure thousands of patches that would describe a custom profile. I knew this would be a requirement about 15 years ago and only recently a technology has come on the market that claims it can do it. The Rapid Spectro Cube (RSC) by ColorGate claims to be able to measure up to 10,000 patches at once for ICC profiles. I don't know how capable this product is but this kind of technology that can measure large numbers of patches quickly and easily, is critical for the development of custom profiles in a very easy and low cost way.

Hi Erik, I might have lost you a bit while reading your post. But the Fogra53 doesn't mean that you get rid of any custom profiles at the printer as I understand it. It rather means that the customer/print buyer can use just one CMYK- working color space. The conversion to the custom icc-profile is still done by the printer.

 

[arossetti]

Even with all the challenges stated already above, if Adobe doesn't include Fogra53 in CC this is D.O.A.

Even if they do include it in Adobe CC if it is not the standard CMYK workingspace for European installs it probably is still DOA. I'm not sure if our customers send us SWOP (US Web Coated 2) files on purpose or because they never updated their color management settings, I'm guessing the latter.

 

[Magnus]

Even with all the challenges stated already above, if Adobe doesn't include Fogra53 in CC this is D.O.A.

Even if they do include it in Adobe CC if it is not the standard CMYK workingspace for European installs it probably is still DOA. I'm not sure if our customers send us SWOP (US Web Coated 2) files on purpose or because they never updated their color management settings, I'm guessing the latter.

True true!

Let's suppose (in a parallel universe) Adobe makes Fogra53 the default CMYK working space. Do you think this wide gamut CMYK would be a good approach then?

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Hi Erik, I might have lost you a bit while reading your post. But the Fogra53 doesn't mean that you get rid of any custom profiles at the printer as I understand it. It rather means that the customer/print buyer can use just one CMYK- working color space. The conversion to the custom icc-profile is still done by the printer.

It sounds to me that any CMYK working color space is not a set of device independent values, therefore I see it as a problem.

 

[Magnus]

Question: My company is using the Coated GRACoL 2006 color profile however, one of our clients is insisting we provide our proofs off our EPson 9900 and to our printer/supplier FOGRA39. We have, up until now output all of our proofs under the GRACoL profile, but now need to print some GRACoL and some FOGRA. Do we need to invest the 30k + for the additional profile? And does the printer / supplier also need to invest or is this even an issue for them?
I'm very new to all of this and I'm just trying to get a better grasp as to what is necessary from my end to make sure our bases are covered and our client is happy.
Thank you very much!

Hello Roland_Epson, your post i really off topic. Please post your question as a new post instead and I'm sure that we can help you to answer your question.

 

[abc]

Interesting that it's not just the Fogra 53 profile that they will supply, but also 'Device link profiles for conversion from and into established Fogra standards will be available shortly.'

 

[Magnus]

Interesting that it's not just the Fogra 53 profile that they will supply, but also 'Device link profiles for conversion from and into established Fogra standards will be available shortly.'

Yes Andrew, there is already some DeviceLink profiles available here (Fogra53 > Fogra51 and Fogra53 > Fogra52): http://www.eci.org/en/downloads

 

[abc]

Could be interesting to make some for US standards as well.

Of course it's an M1 profile inline with the latest Fogra standards, made with Heidelberg PrintOpen it seems.

# Printopen - Profile parameter setup #
CMYK_PROFILE: "Y"
TOTAL_DOT: "400"
MAX_BLACK: "90"
BLACK_LENGTH: "69"
BLACK_WIDTH: "3"
PRESERVE_COLORS: "0"
SATURATION_DARKER_LIGHTER: "0"
CONTRAST_DARKS: "N"
COLOR_SATURATION: "0"
GLOBAL_DARKER_LIGHTER: "0"
GRAYAXIS_CORR: "N"
AXIS_CORRECTION: "5"
AUTO_MEASCORR: "N"
# Proof setting: #
CONS_BRIGHTENERS: "N"
LIGHTNESS_ADAPT: "N"
PAPERWHITE_LVAL: "0.0"

Curve from Colorthink attached

 

[arossetti]

True true!

Let's suppose (in a parallel universe) Adobe makes Fogra53 the default CMYK working space. Do you think this wide gamut CMYK would be a good approach then?

I agree that if a designer is going to create a file in CMYK, having the largest CMYK gamut possible as the starting point would be optimal, so in that sense yes it is a good idea.

However the amount of time/energy needed to educate people to use it seems to be outside the resources of a Fogra/Idealliance group. I would be interested to know what percent of print buyer and print providers are aware of any of this.

 

[Roland_Epson]

Hello Roland_Epson, your post i really off topic. Please post your question as a new post instead and I'm sure that we can help you to answer your question.

Apologies - Removed.

 

[Puch]

However the amount of time/energy needed to educate people to use it seems to be outside the resources of a Fogra/Idealliance group. I would be interested to know what percent of print buyer and print providers are aware of any of this.

That is the "real world experience", which I tried to emphasize. No matter what 'advantages' Fogra or any other institution invents, what matters at the end of the day is what the end user understand from all of it – and what can he/she implement in his/her own workflow?

I might dance for a whole week continuosly if Adobe would embrace this new CMYK standard AND make it the worldwide default in all its applications. After the 'Advanced' button is pressed in Color Setup, a Q&A page must come up, checking the basic knowledge of the user. Only after a successful test should the user tinker with color spaces etc.

 

[Magnus]

I would be interested to know what percent of print buyer and print providers are aware of any of this.

Probably not many yet. But the reason I got my eyes on this topic and started this thread is because I got a question regarding Fogra53 from a print buyer. A minor company called H&M..

 

[Magnus]

..what matters at the end of the day is what the end user understand from all of it – and what can he/she implement in his/her own workflow?

If this approach is implemented as a standard world wide (some time in the future) the end user (read: creative design guy) might not need to understand CMYK and advanced color settings.