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

[Lukas Engqvist]

D Ink I think Luc's post was almost lost there in the cross fire.

But again Pantone is selling in k not colour, why is that important in Art… well for the inhouse Ink manufacturer I guess it is not a problem, but there are many papers in between coated and uncoated. Papers where the ink will not match any swatch book. So if there would have been more mixes to acheive the same printed colour there would be more possible combinations of human error (or subjective decissions). I would have a hard time explaining to a customer well you asked for pantone 123, but I mixed it assuming that this semicoated behaved like a coated, and the last printer that you used probably used the formula for uncoated. So using the "uncoated" formula, on a coated stock would give an even more yellow.

Yeah I'll have some popcorn plz

 

[D Ink Man]

Uno inky, nada matchy ona kooted und unkotted papyrus papaire. Comprendo dische speckra dische langawage now mein fledlings? Hopo so. Pantone = OJ. Now youz I's opener more einstein scientificos?

 

[GazKL440]

D Ink Man: FFs mate you have made a mountain of a molehill!!!! Perhaps you should read back some of the posts written here and have think about them and discontinue this pigheaded crusade against the evil empire that pantone would force upon us..

yes...pms 123 uncoated vs coated gives us a different appearance...no one has argued that!!! It does look markedly different, and the "why" of this has surely been put to rest with some very logical and intelligent replies.... Did you note that the percentages of ink required are IDENTICAL with regards to PMS123c and PMS123u????? That is why we have adjustability on presses....like OH MY GOD you can lessen or increase ink films to get the desired result???? Why yes indeedy it CAN BE DONE!!!! If you must know...its called manual profiling, which is one of the reasons we have "men on the machines"

At the end of the day, pantone provides a universally accepted standard that printers worldwide can use to easily match customised colours on any stock the client requires... and i do feel that your petty whining has seen you forget that the aim of the game is to produce, reproduce and SELL printing, and the client really does not care how you do this.......just that its done to their satisfaction!!!

/end rant, opinion delivered...

 

[D Ink Man]

GazKL:

I resent that your reply described my efforts and cause as 'petty whining'. You are not in the part of the print business obviously where this Pantone inadequacy effects your operation enough to rape profit from your organization. You're on the other side of this planet and the methodologies you may be using are inherently different from my continent. So i would appreciate if you would stop ridiculing my Pantone points, WHICH ARE VALID, and nothing you or anyone says will change my viewpoint. You have been typically the type of individual who condones what Pantone does and the resist the fact they sell COLOR ONLY, irresponsibly and get away with it as they are basically a monopoly as stated prior. If I was not so passionate about this scourge in the industry, I would not have ever written the original post and followed through trying to emphasize it. My fight and efforts to make people in the industry aware of this will continue no matter how much havoc it may create for people like you who do not understand. Respectfully, you are not the only one in this position. The education and rightful values I am offering will continue until an appreciable comprehension is gained. D

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

… sell COLOR ONLY,

Now do they? The Pantone Matching system was developed by Letrasett ages ago. They used to be coloured films, felt tip penns and other stuff. Today Pantone is owned by xRite, a company that has too some degree a monoploly, but this may be a good thing.

Changing legacy stuff and balancing backwards compatibility and future development you have not answered. What if you use your energy to create a debate on how this is to be done? (Now perhapps in looking at this you may find GOE as one of the answers.)

Instead of answering this you say we are being scientific and destroying your "graphic" approach. If you want to be treated seriously and with respect, please also treat those who take the time to make explanations with respect.
(Comments like:

Uno inky, nada matchy ona kooted und unkotted papyrus papaire. Comprendo dische speckra dische langawage now mein fledlings? Hopo so. Pantone = OJ. Now youz I's opener more einstein scientificos?

I have no idea how you expect them to add to any serious intentions that you say you have. If you want to create an impact you will need to calm down and present a coherent argument, and that includes and meets the debate that arises without dissrespecting it or rediculing it.)

 

[D Ink Man]

Lukas,

The quote>>>> Uno inky, nada matchy ona kooted und unkotted papyrus papaire. Comprendo dische speckra dische langawage now mein fledlings? Hopo so. Pantone = OJ. Now youz I's opener more einstein scientificos? <<<<

I'm sorry, but this was a satirical, humorous reply, because my efforts to be rational and practical in my cause have for the most part been overridden by some forum members on insisting something of the objectivity of my original post on September 11, 2009. "I" am the one who created the post and asked the ?question?. This is MY post and I am looking for some supportative allegiance in regards to Pantone's irresponsibility. I DO NOT have the answer on how to SOLVE the VERY REAL problem PANTONE is in regards to the original subject matter, that is why I created the post. Again, the GOE system will help' in my opinion, 80% to overcome the problem, but the industry has only accepted the GOE system at an estimated 1% clip. So, in my opinion, Pantone (as stated in an earlier reply) should DISCONTINUE the standard Pantone Guide and only support the newer GOE system. That action would be the be the ANSWER and what I have to OFFER from a LOGICAL and PRACTICAL standpoint to SOLVE this, which bothers me and so many others that have not accessed the Print Planet forum. We are all not genuises and use the computer to share our innermost feelings. That's my contribution and I ask that you respect it and accept it. D

 

[GazKL440]

D Ink Man: apologies for the "petty whining" comment, perhaps not necessary.

it was your quote that set me off.... condescention irritates the shit out of me...

Perhaps the lack of agreement here is more related to the parts of the industry we work in, you are in tech rep/supply side, i am in the production and manufacturing side. As a machinist, i dont have time to pontificate on the mysteries of the pantone system, i have deadlines to meet and workflow to manage. So rather than worry about the ramifications of one ink looking different on different stocks, i make ready, get the job right and run it. If need be, we will have a client press check the job and sign off on it, but generally our pre press and sales staff will have given the client understanding of stock and colour differentiation, so very very rarely will this be an issue. Rarely enough for me to consider it truly insignificant. At my second job, running small presses, i may mix half a dozen pantone colours a shift, unless its on the shelf, and match the sample.....and on older presses there is no densitometer or auto profiling, simply my judgement...and regardless of the stock you make it look RIGHT... and always note down any minor customising that the pantone system required....

I think you will find that operation and methodology in Australia is comparable to any worldwide...perhaps you are forgetting that printing is a fairly simple equation that is only made more difficult with speed of operation...and if any company cant deal with the pantone "inadequacy" then they are lucky to still be in operation!

I did not disagree with your original point: pantone colours do vary on different stocks, i have a new edition at work and an old edition at home that both testify to this fact... but i do disagree that its an issue worthy of such angst... simply get the job right to the clients satisfaction, and continue on with your day! Every manufacturing process has its pros and cons, its how well you deal with them that makes the difference, not how loudly you complain...

 

[D Ink Man]

GazKL.

You have a very excellent point about doing what it takes to get the color in 'your' operation, which is probably one printing plant. Within the confines of that single plant it is much easier to 'control the color', because it is being done in house. You can I would think have a proof (rollout) of the intended ink for each job and spot color for that job on the stock that would be run. In that case you would have management and control of your color because you are dealing with a rather small amount of jobs.

But think of this as if you were in my position. I am 'TRYING' to control color for hundreds of printing plants and thousands of jobs. Most times we will not have the job stock (97%+ estimate) for each job printed. And even if we had the job stock for each of the thousand of jobs, it would be too impractical and physically impossible to proof every ink for every job. That is why it is so important that Pantone be correct for color on a general COATED and UNCOATED paper, which is in their guides, but the inproper ink films are the killer in trying to achieve this. If they WERE close as in the example Pantone 123 (many other PMS interblends could be mentioned) on CTD and UNCTD then we would have a legitimate chance to provide reasonable commercial color to our customers. I better understand what you have said because I placed myself in your shoes and mindset from your position in a single printing plant. Now please put yourself in my shoes, for a brief moment, and maybe you will appreciate what I have to overcome as mentioned. Thanks Gaz, and to everyone who can perhaps now better understand the reasoning and problems faced for this subject. D

 

[Luc St-Pierre]

No one no longers argue over the shade of a green apple in a CMYK picture out of a press, and that is because process controls exist and this argument, if so, is now beeing done where it should be: prepress.To try to get back to the point, Pantone does not own every other colors that are not part of a CMYK gamut, they just grab the opportunity opened by this fact. Call me a dreamer, especially in those financially difficult days, I repeat that the answer to the problem of spot colors is to replace CMYK, good old 4-color process, with a wider gamut that would embrace 95% or so of all spot colors. Probably a 7 color process CMYRGBK, under the same controls that supports CMYK today. The other arguments on this post all concern the variations of color through different glosses. And this will always be. Pantone C over Pantone U and then what about all the differents overcoats beeing used? The effect of corona treats under the inks? Laminations? etc. This is not a matter of color. And if you absolutely need to manage the glosses as part of the color, then re-fingerprint and re-characterize all your processes with all these glosses, varnishes, laminations beeing included.

 

[meddington]

For those still with us, here's my sample matches of PMS123 on coated and uncoated stocks compared to their respective pantone guides. One ink mind you. Each thumbnail compares the Pantone guide measurement (black) to my sample (red). Its evident that an acceptable match was obtained for both coated and uncoated, and I have no doubts that this can be achieved in production. Yes, its true that ink film was increased on the uncoated sample, which should be no surprise to printers out there, as ink volume needs to increase to compensate for absorbency of the uncoated paper. This occurs in process colors as well. Uncoated paper requires more ink even to maintain less density than a coated paper. Printing at the same ink film on coated and uncoated isn't realistic. You milage may vary on your paper stock with your ink, but the guides themselves are not out in left field.

I don't expect this will abate the polemic against Pantone, but thought I'd throw out (again) that this isn't an impossibility. I do agree that Pantone isn't perfect, and maybe you'll have more luck with the GOE guides (or see more of the same). For us here, we print Pantone colors of all varieties and only rarely have matching problems...mostly with metallics.

 

[D Ink Man]

Med,
Prepare slip sheet stacks and alternately impress any coated and uncoated stack.1) Run the ink film to match the Pantone 123 C book and compare your same ink film on the uncoated sheet. 2) Using the same ink run the Pantone 123 and visually match the uncoated book. Compare this Uncoated match run now to the coated. LOOK at it. Now hopefully using a critical test form with fine reverses , vignettes and small percentage highlight dots, LOOK at your print test piece and tell me about the quality of your print subjects. You will have NO ANSWER, with a one ink entity.

I expect you will not do this and just offer more of your contrary opinions and try to support it with more non practical Lab values that most readers will not, do not and cannot understand from a laymens terms to produce sellable printing. You are very much a contrarian Med, close minded and it shows throughout the replies you have posted at Print Planet. I do not reply to posts where I am considered by myself, to be a non expert. You reply to most posts, because you are the Godof printing in your own mind and may think that Alois Senefelder is one of your ancestors. Stop being a know it all and LISTEN and respond responsibly when you have some TRUE knowledge to share. If you don't heed this advice you will be known as a fraud and people will respect you less and take your advice with a grain of a salt. Respect this. D

 

[meddington]

Med,
Prepare slip sheet stacks and alternately impress any coated and uncoated stack.1) Run the ink film to match the Pantone 123 C book and compare your same ink film on the uncoated sheet. 2) Using the same ink run the Pantone 123 and visually match the uncoated book. Compare this Uncoated match run now to the coated. LOOK at it. Now hopefully using a critical test form with fine reverses , vignettes and small percentage highlight dots, LOOK at your print test piece and tell me about the quality of your print subjects. You will have NO ANSWER, with a one ink entity.

I agree with you that there are different ink film requirements for coated and uncoated and thought that was evident from my posts. At coated ink films, the uncoated sample will look weak (though still red), and at uncoated ink films the coated sample will be oversaturated and likely will have drying/set off issues. I still maintain that sellable printing is possible for coated and uncoated at their respective ink films, closely matching the pantone guides. If you've done this test yourself, share your results (a scan of poor image/type reproduction, density or lab values if your able, something). I'd be interested to see and am certainly open to bring proved wrong (without taking it personally).

The rest of your post doesn't dignify a response.

 

[D Ink Man]

I will go with that your absolutely correct on everything Meddinton. It is accepted. I apologize for the point of view I have stated in this thread. The thread has snapped and again, you are 100% correct. Thanks Meddinton for what you do for Print Planet.

 

[GazKL440]

wow...enough shots to fight a war over an issue that until this thread i had noted years ago but never considered......remotely important....

Please D Ink Man....dont get started on the war!!!!

I dont have anything to add...i agree with Meddington etc, but dont disagree with D Ink Man entirely... but it definately aint worth washing up a 40 inch to test something i have known for years.... Im going to have some beers....many many beers

 

[D Ink Man]

Pantone is King, and if you choose to make the choice to LIVE in the rule of its Monarchy as followers and paupers, so be it. You have drank the Kool Aid.

Me, I would rather DIE fighting against a kingdom that is unjust which leaves its people fleeced, hopeless and impoverished. And you followers are that, whether you realize it or not. No rebuttals please. I shall not drink, what you have swallowed.

The mass contigent of followers to the Pantone kingdom have been brainwashed nad misconceived into the Moarchy, so go ahead and LIVE in its throes. May your conscience be your guide.

I am prepared to go to the gallows now, without struggle. It is nothing but something we will all shall face one day. I shall not fret as I make the walk, because in my heart I know my existence was justified by a righteous, godly and humane effort.

 

[meddington]

"No rebutals please" is a rather closed minded attitude coming from one who accuses others of the same. There is no koolaid and I certainly agree that pantone indeed isn't perfect...most notable for me is their process guides which I find amusing at best. The solid coated and uncoated guides are just that...guides. If you'd like to present that they are not achievable with a particular device/ink/substrate combination, there's not much argument that can be made against that. Any hardcopy color is device dependent. But to say that they are not achievable on any lithographic press on the planet...that's just absurd. You asked for opinions and I gave you mine, which was met with drama, sarcasm and rudeness. There's no reason why this can't be (couldn't have been) a civil discussion.

 

[D Ink Man]

Your are 100% correct Meddinton, as always.

 

[GazKL440]

Agreed.... lol nothing to see here..

wait.... what???

 

[Ink Tech]

Whether you like Pantones 'monopoly' or not. It is considered the standard that most companies will work to. This is due to its comparative ease of use and to be honest, the lack of any other universal and usable standards out there.

If you want results close to the coated and uncoated books then your first task is to find a coated and uncoated substrate that matches those used in the guide. Your second will be to use Pantone basic colours that match the same properties as the ones used in your particular Pantone guide. Without these at hand you will have to understand that this is a Pantone GUIDE and there are certain colour tolerances involved.

Uncoated papers vary so much due to weight, quality, whiteness and material that you need to be prepared to either make changes on press or have a Pantone colour matched specifically to the paper used on the job. This flaw would be apparent with any matching system unless a particular ink set and substrate was specified with each colour guide.

 

[D Ink Man]

Ink Tech,

I have requested the stocks that Pantone prints its most current edition OK. And, I have received them and done work. Using absolute controlled ink film thickness parameters, I proofed ONE INK, Pantone registerd trademark strength book formula. The results proved this: 1) With the Coated book, I had to STARVE the ink film to get color that was even close, this includes visaully and spectrophotometrically. 2) With the Uncoated book, I had to run a film that would be equivalent to a SILK SCREEN film. In both cases I could not get either ink to match with a Delta E of under 2.00. This is where the problem lies, from the fantasy that Pantone is. It is unrealistic and the New Jersey attitudes that govern this Pantone, will look you straight in the eye and proclaim they are a viable source for color. And this is what the Print Planet must deal with, a monopoly that has no competition. If you too have drank the Kool Aid that is Pantone, that is your perogrative and I respect that. My mind will not change beacause I know what I'm dealing with. PANTONE DECEIPT. Pantone 123 is the example of this thread, but there are numerous other interblends within the two guides that are of the REAL problem. PANTONE is DECEIPT. There only vindication can be to DISCONTINUE these current guides and support for them and convert to GOE only, from this point forward. Until then, the facts will not change which have been offered in this thread. The Planet needs to retaliate NOW.