Re: Pantone issue in QRK 6 and 7
This is what I get when going by Kate's instructions:
In InDesign CS2, made PANTONE 449 spot color from PANTONE solid coated (C) or solid uncoated (U) or solid to process (PC) library. Used Ink Manager to convert to process. CMYK 65,55,100,28.
Output to rip to verify what Separations Preview is telling me, and the above numbers are correct. Ahh, the good old days of actually knowing what the CMYK numbers would be. In CS3 this changes though, because the different libraries have different CMYK values even though the same names in cases!
In QuarkXPress 6.5, in Edit Colors, made PANTONE 449 spot color from PANTONE solid coated (C) or solid uncoated (U) or solid to process coated (PC) library, changed mode to CMYK. CMYK 65,55,100,28.
So for coated AND uncoated printing, if using InDesign CS2 or Quark 6.5, then the same CMYK numbers will be used no matter which of the three libraries are used.
In InDesign CS3, made PANTONE 449 spot color from PANTONE solid coated (C) or solid uncoated (U) or solid to process (PC) library. Used Ink Manager to convert to process. CMYK 65,55,100,28.
Color bridge numbers added in InDesign CS3. Made CMYK color by choosing PANTONE color bridge CMYK PC library, choose 449, get color PANTONE 449 PC, but won't add to swatches because there is already a swatch named this (from solid to process library). So I have to delete the solid to process color 449 and then add the color bridge PC color 449. Same name as the other. But different CMYK values! This libraries CMYK 32,36,73,77 for process of 449! Not even close to the other when both sets of numbers printed on GRACoL2006_Coated1v2.
Add using color bridge UP library to get uncoated CMYK numbers in InDesign CS3, and it gives yet another set of numbers that differ from the coated numbers. These uncoated color bridge numbers for 449 are CMYK 34,28,62,42. Sigh).
Output to rip to verify what Separations Preview is telling me, and the above numbers are correct.
Did two tests in Quark 7 (one from a new document, and one from opening the 6.5 legacy document just created in last paragraph, although could do more tests with more varied results because Quark 7 makes it easy to get different results depending on if CMYK or Spot is chosen (recommended by me) or As Is is chosen (not recommended by me). Whether outputting as CMYK and Spot via PostScript and letting Adobe make the PDF/X-1a which I drop on my rip hotfolder to convert Spot colors to CMYK using the Spot color's Alternate CMYK colorspace, or whether choosing CMYK Mode in Edit Colors, for all three libraries, no matter if in an opened legacy project or new project, I get the color bridge numbers CMYK 32,36,73,77. So the older numbers we got for 6.5 can not be used unless set manually as a CMYK color! Note: Uncoated color bridge library not available in Quark 7 (at least we don't have yet another set of CMYK numbers given - it's confusing enough!)
So in Quark 6.5 or Adobe InDesign CS2, I get the same numbers no matter what library I have chosen of the three. But in CS3 or Quark 7, it's just messed up, no longer able to get one set of CMYK numbers for a PANTONE color, and the newest CMYK numbers aren't even made for the international standard. And this is improvement?
So now we not only have old and new libraries in the same application, we have the same name given to them although they give two different sets of CMYK numbers for the same color (and if using color bridge UP library to get uncoated CMYK numbers in InDesign CS3, because uncoated color bridge library not available in Quark 7, gives yet another set of numbers that differ from the coated numbers. Sigh).
Great reason not to upgrade to CS3 or Quark 7, huh? Or is the color bridge CMYK numbers closer to the original when printed on the international standard than the old numbers? Or is it better to forego dealing with PANTONE CMYK values and just use PANTONE Lab values and color management to come up with better values? We'll discuss hopefully. But I'll tell you this: All this crap makes me want to start using Lab values for PANTONE colors. Either way, the legacy stuff ain't gonna match the new stuff.
Man printing is sucking more and more, and more and more I'm wanting to run for the hills to get away from this crazy stuff - but it's F'd up WORLD WIDE!
Don