One Profile - Multiple Presses

[Brad38CMU]

I have my thoughts, but I'm curious what everyone else's opinions are on how to create an individual press profile that will be utilized across multiple presses at different facilities? It is a given that all variables are controlled and consistent across all presses. Would you just run up a characterization on one press and roll with it? Or would you run the characterization on multiple presses and average the data together?

 

[johnny_jay]

Run to a standard and fingerprint and adjust to meet that standard.

 

[chriscozi]

Run to a standard and fingerprint and adjust to meet that standard.

Me thinks not an answer to the question.

 

[chriscozi]

I have my thoughts, but I'm curious what everyone else's opinions are on how to create an individual press profile that will be utilized across multiple presses at different facilities? It is a given that all variables are controlled and consistent across all presses. Would you just run up a characterization on one press and roll with it? Or would you run the characterization on multiple presses and average the data together?

Do NOT average - that leaves no stability in the results as any one machine will effect all the others.
If it is IMPOSSIBLE to fingerprint individual machines and/or implement different profiles at proof/output stage THEN you could, conceivably, use the same profile for all.
I firmly believe there will be variation independent of the 'controlled' variables between machines.
You also don't specify the controls or the types of machines or the environments or . . .
You will be 'close' in most circumstances. We had three 40" Heidelbergs side by side and they were different, not radically but fairly consistently different which we casually determined was 60/40 :: machine/operator.
Don't get me started on Operator adjustment preferences - see the 'I just increased the pressure because of the blanket and now the color doesn't match.'

Do you use 'contract proofs'? What kind?

 

[johnny_jay]

Me thinks not an answer to the question.

Why? If each press has a different aim, how would work across the different plants ever match? If proofs are output to CRPC-5 then fingerprint each press at each location to that standard.

 

[chriscozi]

Why? If each press has a different aim, how would work across the different plants ever match? If proofs are output to CRPC-5 then fingerprint each press at each location to that standard.

But the question was 'how to create an individual press profile that will be utilized across multiple presses at different facilities?' and your response says fingerprint.
You assume ALL the presses are calibrated.

The poster says "Would you just run up a characterization on one press and roll with it? Or would you run the characterization on multiple presses and average the data together?"
Which, by 'characterization', I am ASSUMING they mean calibrate/fingerprint.
So I am ASSUMING they are ASKING can they calibrate ONE press and use that everywhere.
ie - "Me thinks not an answer to the question."

 

[Magnus]

What types of presses are we discussing here? Are they all offset machines?

If you're referring to offset presses, you can work with a single CMYK profile. However, it's essential to align the presses using TVI or G7 curves in the RIP. This involves conducting test prints on each press, measuring the results, and using tools like PressSign or Curve3 to generate the necessary curve adjustment data.

While this approach is simpler than creating separate CMYK profiles for each press, it still requires some effort, as no two presses print exactly the same.

 

[SheetSqueezer]

Trying to find a middle ground somewhere between simple plating and 'good enough' printing?

I'm trying to understand why you'd want one, basically generic average for all presses at multiple locations? I understand the probable reasons for simplifying the amount of plating curve(s) used in plating but if you're going to be making plates at each location, you might as well at least have a unique curve set for only the presses at that location - not one average curve from/for all of them.

I also recommend having 2 curves for each location: 1 for coated and 1 for uncoated substrates.