PMS Book not matching InDesign PMS builds

[Digital Prepress Girl]

I have a client that is using a PMS Solid Coated color 644. When I look at my Color Coated Bridge book and InDesign CS4 the 2 are different. My PMS book is from 2005. Is it possible that Pantone changes percentages of a color but not change the PMS name? Or is Adobe not playing exactly with Pantone? Can anyone help? I'm having to change the artwork to match the Pantone book so it will print how the client wants.
Thank you!

 

[bgardner]

Are you looking to print this pantone as CMYK and get the closest possible match???

What are the CMYK values bridge and indesign are telling you to use for 644?

 

[Digital Prepress Girl]

The Bridge book is telling me. C:41, M:11, Y:2 and B:6
InDesign is telling me C:42, M:15, Y:0 and B:6

I can work around it to get it to print correctly. I'd just really like to know why they are different.

 

[bgardner]

Funny my Solid to process build book is showing 38/8.5/0/11.5

It just has to do with the look up tables based on what software you use

I don't think theres an actual explanation

 

[Digital Prepress Girl]

I did find in InDesign, Pantone Color Bridge CMYK PC. Don't exactly know what this means but PMS 644 does match the Color Bridge book I am using.

 

[Tinpot Dictator]

This article may shed some light on things...
Fundamentally, Pantone found that current technologies have allowed for a more accurate representation of the colour library. I know initially it was all contained strictly within the Bridge, but some of it may have migrated as newer incarnations of software came along.
R.
TinDic

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

I love the maths (from last page in report @ infobox) "target ink densities (K 175%, C 140%, M 145%, Y
100%)." Do you really measure density in %?

 

[Tinpot Dictator]

A sin of the times

A sin of the times

Just goes to show how little stock is placed in corroborating one's facts before they are published. I would love to say I'm surprised, but I see it every day.
TinDic

 

[Digital Prepress Girl]

Tinpot,
Thank you for the PDF. I understand it much better now. It all comes down to what Pantone Library the Designer selects. I need them to use the Color Bridge PC. Now only if I could get them to do that. HA!

 

[Tinpot Dictator]

DPG,
It would be beneficial if they did, but I don't see it as imperative. I have been suggesting it to designers for several years, but most designers could care less. If your designer is not using the new mixes then why change colours to match their (presumably) old book?
TD

 

[Arthaven]

PANTONE loves to tweak their builds every few years. Then you have three books with three different builds for the same spot and various programs giving you even more variations. Good times!

 

[Alith7]

Just my two cents, but I've found when printing Spot colors as 4-color, Adobe gives the best breakdowns.
they are MUCH closer to the original PMS than Bridge, and Quark 7's are so off it's not worth using (though I think they are the same as what is in my color bridge.)
It's a tricky business converting spots to process in the best of times. Even worse when dealing with uncoated versus coated papers. I've had customers pick all their colors and supply us with the PMS #'s (supposedly high-end designers), only to find out that they had been looking at a coated book and the whole project was printing on uncoated.

edit:
Oh, and Pantone does says EVERYWHERE that you should get new books EVERY year. it's not just because they want to stay in business, but they DO regularly change their formulas, and they DO fade and color shift over time and using a book that is almost 5 years old can REALLY hamper you.
I had a another customer try to kick a job because they said we printed the wrong color, only to follow up and find out that the designer was using a 10 year old PMS book that was soo far off color I don't know how she EVER had anything printed right.

 

[jstanzione]

I have read this discussion concerning PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE and wanted to pass along information which may be helpful.

There are three distinct libraries that work with PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE, which are named as follows:

PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE CMYK PC - works with PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE COATED
PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE CMYK UP - works with PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE UNCOATED
PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE CMYK EC - works with PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE COATED EURO (European edition).

When the intention is to simulate PANTONE colors using CMYK, the colors should be selected from one of the above libraries, based on the version of PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE guide that is being used.

One additional note: PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE was launched in April 2005. The PANTONE solid to process guide coated became obsolete as of that date. PANTONE COLOR BRIDGE libraries are native to Adobe CS3 and later.

Best regards,

John Stanzione
Manager - Technical Support
Pantone LLC
Wholly-owned Subsidiary of X-Rite, Inc.

 

[Tinpot Dictator]

Thanks for the heads up John, it's largely in line with what I had come to assume.

That said, is there any way to get all these old solid to process guides to self destruct so we can get to weaning these designers onto something new, new now being 4+ years old.

TinDic

 

[Mike Strickler]

PMS Book not matching InDesign PMS builds

This whole subject causes a lot of confusion. Some possibly useful points:

Keep in mind that the Solid to Process Libraries define colors less precisely than the Solid Coated and Solid Uncoated libraries do. The latter colors are defined colorimetrically, in L*a*b* numbers, and the definition is independent of variations in printing conditions or substrate. It is assumed in this case that one is actually mixing this color and printing it with its own plate. The former, on the other hand, are simply approximations of the color "recipe" one would need to match this color's appearance in CMYK. It's a guess, and the exact numbers would vary depending on printing conditions and substrate choice. So just because you may match the C, M, Y, and K percentages doesn't at all mean that the printed colors will match.

Try this experiment:Using the Color Picker find your color in the Solid Coated library. Note the CMYK equivalent percentages. Close the picker. Now go to your Edit menu and open Color Settings. Change your default CMYK color space. Now look up your spot color again. Notice the CMYK percentages are now different? This is because you've changed the assumed target press conditions. At the same time, the numbers that describe the color appearance, the L*a*b* numbers, have not changed. Think about this.

Summary: If you are calling out the same SOLID spot color, not process equivalent, you are defining the same color. If you are calling out a CMYK process equivalent, you may not be. The latter depends on what press conditions have been specified and what version of the Solid-to-Process Library you are using.

Finally, in actual printing, 3- or 4-color pastels are notoriously hard to match with precision. On the other hand, if an extra plate is used, the ink will be mixed to match and verified by an ink drawdown, and that is a relatively easy way to get the color right.

Mike Strickler
MSP Graphic Services

 

[rich apollo]

An addendum to Mike's post - you have to tell InDesign to use the Lab values. Go into the Ink Manager and click 'Use Standard Lab Values for Spots'. It defaults to using the pre-baked CMYK mixes in the pallet.

 

[roel78]

Another addendum to Mike's post - you definitely wan't to use a relative colourimetric (not a perceptual) rendering intent. So before you export to PDF, check your colour settings AND your solid colour intent (Go to the edit-menu and choose assign profiles).

 

[apepp]

...in my experience even the latest pantone books themselves can vary with a side by side comparison, so even pantone get it inconsistent sometimes, discovered this when a client received printed product claiming the spot ink was a shade off compared to his latest book, judging by our same said latest book it was mighty fine, so off we went to pantone, gave us a new one and when comparing all the books the pantone rep was pulling out the box we saw further inconsistencies...

...who said color was easy right?

: )

 

[rich apollo]

Another addendum to Mike's post - you definitely wan't to use a relative colourimetric (not a perceptual) rendering intent. So before you export to PDF, check your colour settings AND your solid colour intent (Go to the edit-menu and choose assign profiles).

roel, can you elaborate?

apepp, there will be variability in any print run. Is what you observed beyond what you would consider acceptable? Just curious - never had the opportunity to throw down a bunch of swatch books and compare.

 

[roel78]

When you convert a PMS color to process then you always have a differnce in print. You can achieve an optimal result if you convert the PMS trought the LAB-method to a specific CMYK-output profile. The best way is to use a CMYK-output profile which is based upon the exact press an paper which gone be used in the job.

For example: Pantone Orange 021 C. Default InDesign values: C=0 M=53 Y=100 K=0 but when you convert this color with our custom profile (based upon our press and paper) we get C=0 M=71 Y=94 K=0. This is the optimal result we will get on our press.

If there's no custom ICC-profile available, you can use some standards profiles. ISO Coated v2 (ECI) will result in: C=0 M=72 Y=100 K=0 (Relative colorimetric).

You see that the magenta value is a lot higher than the InDesign default. In print this will result in a better match.

Has anyone the same experience as I do?