P A N T O N E Thoughts on 9/11

[meddington]

As someone who has done work for both the folding carton industry and National Geographic, I can say that, depending on the project, the requirements for quality and consistentcy can be equal for both.Some of our most demanding clients are in folding carton, and they use a lot of pantone colors...way more than commercial work. Brand identity is critical for them.
Just sayin'

 

[D Ink Man]

That's true Meddington but...

That's true Meddington but...

CD102 spoke about the variation in his folding carton print operations and obviously by his reply that particular genre of work places little value on color consistency. They just print the job within the customers specifications and those specifications must have a looseness akin to Pantone 123 coated to uncoated, part of the whole subject of this original post. Again quality, consistency and ease of use are the colleges I have gone too. D

 

[The Heidelberg Guy]

good tradesman doesnt blame the tools...just gets the job done....

Great saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[D Ink Man]

Heidelberg guy, why don't you and your company come up witnh a better tool for color control versus Pantone. Lord knows you peddle everything else!?!?!

 

[The Heidelberg Guy]

Color control is different from what the Pantone matching system is. Personally, I dont have any issues with Pantone, it is what it is. Pantone cannot possibly make a system that blankets all of the variables in printing.

The Pantone library is loaded in every sheet measuring device Heidelberg makes, I dont think they have any issues with it.

 

[disbellj]

D Ink Man,

Do yourself a favor and quit trying to change the world. If you continue, it might affect your health.

You can not change obstinate man.

myPANTONE on iPhone

This shows clearly how PANTONE operates. They deserve to be sued, yes. Who's gonna do it?

Just like you see problems and say "go to Goe!", I see problems, but see more problems with Goe.

1. PANTONE claims to print to the international standard "where applicable" in their color bridge. Where applicable!?! Where applicable!?! How about this: ISO 12647-2 has tolerances. Either you meet them or you don't. There's no such thing as "where applicable".
2. Their solids are not even with ISO 12647-2 tolerance, so the rest of the guide is garbage.
3. When there is such a slight difference between ISO Coated v2 and GRACoL2006_Coated1v2, PANTONE could have decided to make ONE version. Why 2 versions, when the U.S. version doesn't even print to GRACoL2006_Coated1v2? Why not just chuck the whole thing out the window and use the Europe version, which should be closer anyways?

As far as Goe goes:
1. I tried their application when it was new. What a disgrace!!! Choose sRGB or Adobe RGB (1998), doesn't matter, you get same RGB numbers?! This is not possible that they can be this stupid, but it's true! You can't have same RGB values for sRGB IEC61966-2.1 and Adobe RGB (1998) and get the same resulting Lab values (whether converted to CMYK and printed or not). Make a new sRGB document and new Adobe RGB (1998) document and fill both with same RGB values, now do a Relative Colorimetric conversion to Lab Color. Different Lab values, right? Of course. So something as fundamental as knowing which RGB is used, and then NOT converting to different RGB values when a new RGB space is used, is asinine, and shows their lack of knowledge on color!
2. What are the equivalent CMYK values? How do we get them? Do we have source Lab values we are aiming to? And then is the conversion to CMYK automatic? Or manual, and we must use Relative Colorimetric Intent with Black Point Compensation? Or manual, and we must use Absolute Colorimetric Intent? Or manual, and Perceptual Intent? How about this: In the version(s) that were first released, there was NO way to get CMYK values. Had to purchase the PANTONE libraries separately to even test with anything hardly. Much more about marketing and money than actually beta testing to get something that worked.

Look at (the second) number 2 above, and tell me that's NOT the reason why most printers aren't going to use Goe. Then if not done yet, click on that link and see how TERRIBLE PANTONE on iPhone REALLY is! Then we see why PANTONE as you describe it may not be good, but God forbid us all getting PUSHED into Goe, which is a HELL of a LOT WORSE!

Edit: I see now that they have the Goe Bridge, to give printers CMYK equivalents. Way to keep yourself in the game PANTONE. Gotta buy a guide to know the CMYK equivalents?

Regards,

Don

 

[turbotom1052]

d ink man ive noticed on press exactly what your talking about with the pantone 123 variation between the coated and uncoated swatch. i too agree that color communication could be greatly improved upon. and i could rant for hours about my feelings on inconsistent ink film thicknesses on press when running various inks. one thing ive noticed is that when it comes to a 4/c process set of inks the variation in film thickness is usually alot less that the variation when running pantone colors. this variation seems to be more noticeable when the specified color has a transparent white component in the formula. at the end of the day its all about satisfying the print buyer. ive encountered many a print buyer thats understanding of the limitations of the process and an equal amount of print buyers that are not, and its for this reason why many companies have a disclaimer printed either on all color proofs submitted for approval, or somewhere on the work order. in my opinion there is nothing wrong with a client insisting on accurate color matches of pms colors but it should be understood that if the expectation of exact color matches are imperative then additional costs may be encountered. then there are the print buyers that will jump on any opportunity that arises to complain about a job in hopes of getting a price reduction AFTER the job is delivered. if your a print buyer and your reading this YOU know if it applies to you. these variations are often the very reason why an experienced print buyer will insist on being on press to sign off on a sheet. the big problem arises when you try to adjust an ink to better match the book and wind up creating a color thats not consistent with a companies corporate identity or that another printer may have run on a past printed piece where no such adjustment was made.

 

[D Ink Man]

Hallelujah !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hallelujah !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Isn't it ironic. When I originally created this post on September 11th, on perhaps the worst day the United States of America has ever experienced, this post shows up today. When? On the day we celebrate the day we declared independence from the rest of the planet that wanted ours for themselves. Thank you sir for your reply, my goose bumps are flowing. I hope the rest of the participants in this forum can now hunker down and take note. God bless you sir, and God Bless the United States of America. Yes even Moonachie, N.J.

 

[GazKL440]

You do understand the meaning of the term "ironic" don't you?

I just have to ask....i don't know why.....but i must!!!

 

[D Ink Man]

Certainly Gaz, and it's as easy as 123. And you should know all about that by now.

 

[GazKL440]

Maaaaaate.....123 has always been easy.

Be it the colour or the countin bro.....IMHO only the true numpties have an issue with either.

Thanks for comin

 

[D Ink Man]

It has been 1 year and 1 day. We now have Pantone+. The issues have not changed. Pantone proclimated this new guide came equipped with more balanced ink films. Unfortunately, not true. Pantone 123 C and Pantone 123 U, same story as before. Starvation versus paint job. Someone was not listening.

 

[D Ink Man]

Time has passed.

Facts:
1) Pantone 123 still exists in it's legendary form.
2) GOEing, GOEing, Gone!
3) Pantone Plus has been born.

Thoughts?

 

[D Ink Man]

Still thinking gentlemen.

D

 

[GazKL440]

It's been what.... 2 years since we had this discussion D?

Fortunately in that time I could count on one hand the amount of spot colours I've printed since then and PMS 123 has not been one of them

My argument hasn't changed with regards to the original issue though: on coated stock or uncoated stock the ink stays the same, just a higher density is required on uncoated paper and regardless it is visually slightly different. As I mentioned way back when we last discussed this, I believe it's the reflective and absorption qualities of the stock that gives us a different appearance.

However it's *possible* that they run a different mix in the PMS charts: just HIGHLY unlikely!!

My 2c

 

[D Ink Man]

It's been what.... 2 years since we had this discussion D?

Fortunately in that time I could count on one hand the amount of spot colours I've printed since then and PMS 123 has not been one of them

My argument hasn't changed with regards to the original issue though: on coated stock or uncoated stock the ink stays the same, just a higher density is required on uncoated paper and regardless it is visually slightly different. As I mentioned way back when we last discussed this, I believe it's the reflective and absorption qualities of the stock that gives us a different appearance.

However it's *possible* that they run a different mix in the PMS charts: just HIGHLY unlikely!!

My 2c

It wasn not suppose to be an argument. It was suppose to be a revelation.

Pantone+, no different.

I cannot put a value on this, but I promise it is worth more than 2c.

D

 

[arossetti]

This was a comical read. Thank you Sir.

 

[D Ink Man]

The Final Answer

The Final Answer

View attachment Pantone 123 Degradation.doc

D Ink Man

 

[meddington]

Can you describe where these CIELab values came from? They are labeled as PMS123, but they plot as a slightly casted grey...quite far from the Pantone+ published Lab values. Just curious.

 

[D Ink Man]

meddington,

This is a very good question. I can see by your reply that you are a man of color.

The CIELab values came from a proprietary laboratory using an older model spectrophotoneter.

To cross check my posted evaluation and results, I will be performing the identical measurements on a state of the art spectro in the not too distant future. When I have captured that data, I will reply with a second attachment showing all the readings that were performed on (Pantone 123 Degradation.doc) utilizing the newer spectrophotometer.

Thank you for your interest and please stay patient as I execute the aforementioned.

D Ink Man