Press issues....thoughts?

[SBD]

HI All,

New here...have some issues and was hoping I could gain some insight into the problems that I have with either my set up or my printer. This is a magazine that is being printer and the process is that I correct RGB photographic images on an EIZO monitor calibrated to adobe 1998. The printer prints in CYMK clearly, using SWOP2006 web coated v2 profile. We go through 2 rounds of hard proofing and after second round, proofs look pretty accurate as far as color, contrast and tonality. I am NOT a pre press person per sey but I have been a very detail oriented, photo editor for at least 15 years so I do not claim to understand the nitty gritty of pre press but I visually know color and how to achieve results. After I am finished with the photographic files, I pass those on to a designer and she uses Indesign for the magazine and does whatever she does, creates a pdf of the magazine, which converts the images to CMYK using the printers profile, and that is what the printer uses on press. I have changed nothing on my end of the process yet over the course of 8 months, the color has been getting worse and worse on press. The editor of the magazine goes to every press check and has to work very hard to get the output to resemble the agreed upon proofs that we approved. I am at a loss because the printer is pushing to examine my process and set up but I really do not feel that is where the problem is given that I have changed not one thing about the process. Isn't the printer supposed to be able to match the proof approved by a customer? They questioned me, in a phone conference, asking me why I do not correct in CMYK and my main reason is we repurpose images so it would require twice the work to correct both an RGB file and a CMYK file and my main point to them was when I convert one of my RGB files to CMYK, I do not visually see enough of a change so that it would affect my corrections....I would not do much different to it then I would do to the RGB file. The minor change I see if slightly less black in the file. The problem on press has been images being too dark overall, too much cyan and too much black. And whether I have the monitor calibrated as I usually do or in SWOP2006....I do not see the increase in blacks or cyan...only the loss of contrast and hi lights blow out very quickly in SWOP profile and the file takes on a metallic sheen to it when printed. Does anyone have any thoughts on what could be going on here....is it me or my system or should this be on the printer to match those proofs? Just kinda stumped on how to move forward and don't want to waste a lot of time if it is not me and the printer is just finger pointing (it is a well known, big printer that does not have the best rep)

Thanks for any thoughts,
SBD

 

[dabob]

SBD, a couple of questions you say that you go through 2 rounds of hard proofing and that after the second round the proofs look pretty accurate, who is doing the proofing work, you or the printer. If its you and the printer does not do a proof - nobody knows how it will print . . . if the printer does a hard proof and can't match it . . . the issue is on him . . . .

 

[shorty83]

RGB has a much wider color gamut than CMYK. A lot of colors change when you convert from RGB to CMYK. Your hard color proofs should be done by the printer since it will most likely represent what they can achieve on press after color converting and press profiles are accounted for.

 

[SBD]

The printer is printing the hard proofs and sending them to us, I make changes on my system, send the hard proofs back to the printer.....for 2 rounds. Then on press we are not getting the results we saw in the proofs. One of my issues of course is that the proofs are not printed on the same paper as the magazine and how much is that part of the problem?

 

[SBD]

Absolutely RGB had a wider color gamut but what I am saying is visually, on my monitor, there is not much of a change...not enough that I would change my process.

 

[SBD]

and I forgot one other factor, we are NOT viewing the proofs in a color booth or 5000k lighting conditions. We used to be with another printer and they had our whole system set up with custom profiles that matched theirs, the exact monitor that they used in the press room, 5k light station, and we only used soft proofing, not hard....it was not perfect all the time but much closer than what we are getting now with this printer.

 

[turbotom1052]

has your printer suggested to you that you allow them to make color corrections? My guess is that it would be their first choice that they do all proofing and color corrections.

 

[SBD]

They have not suggested it but it would not be in our best interest due to our subject matter.....many many many species of animals which the printer would have no idea what color they should be especially if it is a specific animal. For example how would they know what shade of blue, our blue-tongued skinks tongue should be? We would never go that route, plus I would be out of a job

Much of what I do is spot correction, not global....it is not a simple matter of adjusting a photo overall but lots of photo shoots involve poor lighting with blue casts....like in black animals, they appear blue on screen and if not compensated for, they actually print blue. Now if there is a blue sky, I can't just globally reduce the blue, I have to do it just on the animal.

 

[SBD]

So does anyone disagree with what dabob said

". . . if the printer does a hard proof and can't match it . . . the issue is on him . . . ."

 

[maas]

"After I am finished with the photographic files, I pass those on to a designer and she uses Indesign for the magazine and does whatever she does, creates a pdf of the magazine, which converts the images to CMYK using the printers profile, and that is what the printer uses on press."

Just to confirm for every round of proofs the printer will generate these from the designer supplied CMYK PDF Files?, i.e. you will make required photographic adjustments in RGB, pass these to the designer to update the links in INDD, export the PDF which then goes to the printer for proofing.

 

[SBD]

Yes, that is the current process exactly.....

 

[maas]

Thank you for clarification, my generic statement to this issue; A digital contone proof is only ever an approximation to an analogy offset press however there is enough written and said about colour management that these two mediums can be managed & measured to be withing an internationally accepted degree of variation, the function of a hard copy proof generated from press ready files is to simulate the expected result on press and when generated by the print house should match the press.

Caveat - i am not suggesting this is a print problem perse (as there is a plate line and RIP to consider, the poor press man may be chasing an unrealistic result), however this is a print shop problem as they control these processes.

 

[SBD]

mass...thanks for the thoughts. Can you give a percentage of error in viewing the proof in non 5k conditions? If I have a good argument that very little of this problem is on our end to take to the boss (or even that there is something on our end to fix, like getting a color correct viewing station) then at least I am not just randomly sending the printer files for them to test, which is what they are having me do now, and jumping through hoops and not have a true replicatable result in the end. But basically I see you saying the majority of this issue is on the printer at some point in their process, from what you gather from my comments?

 

[maas]

I am hesitant to attribute a % to anything of this nature as colour perception is subjective and environment is one of the many considerations, i would advocate a meeting with a senior decision maker of the print company and outline your concerns, as a GM i would want this feedback if this was my business, your leading question should be "what do you need from me" to ensure my expectations are met, with this SWOP2006 is the Adobe default, i would not be using this but again it depends on your printer's requirements

You could go as far as to ask for a joint approach to resolve this, this will allow yourself the opportunity to get familiar with the print process and its rich nomenclature, and conversely the print crew can get an insight into colour from a photographic perspective, my point being the more you understand each other's businesses and pain points the more able you are to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement.


Personally i would be interested to see a comparison of print and proof for a test target like the Forgra image quality test form available here - https://www.fogra.org/index.php?menuid=279&reporeid=208&getlang=en

 

[SBD]

That was my comment to the printer when I saw the printed piece before the editor made any corrections on press. That it looked JUST like SWOP2006 profile as viewed on my monitor and then the editor has to back track from that to try to recover details and hi lights lost in that profile and that maybe a custom profile just for us and our subject matter might be something that could produce a more consistent and better result. My other thought is to have their press person come here, look at my system, make sure everything is as it should be, look at the designers system to make sure how she has Indesign set up for conversion is correct. We do have a rep with the company so we do have support and an intermediate to work with....my issue is that this has slowly creeped up and gotten increasingly worse over an 8 month or so period of time with nothing that I am aware of, changing on our end. Our editor is VERY aware of the print process and all the nuances of press lingo, paper, cmyk and we work together in proofing the images together in a dark room with 18% gray walls, to make sure I didn't miss anything before we send to the designer. The editor has been in the business for 30 years, always goes on press checks and understands it all....so in that sense we are trying to work together in a joint approach, if that is indeed what needs to be done. I am just not convinced much of the issue starts here for the sole reason that nothing has changed here. I am not unwilling to do something different or get a proper viewing station or get a new monitor or whatever else might be something to make this a better situation.....

 

[SBD]

and to add insult to injury they had run over 90 THOUSAND copies of the last issue before even having the editor come in for the press check....that they fully intended and did send out to customers....many were off register on the entire issue with horrible color shift to cyan....

 

[SBD]

Is there a book or online resource anyone can point me to so I can read up and be more informed on the print process?

 

[AP90]

Heres a few of the things I'd like to know and point out.

1. Why did you switch from a printer that you were happy with? You seemed to mention that they had a nice set up for you, and while it wasn't perfect it worked out well. Seems like they were a good printer for you guys.

2. Id demand that the proofs be on the paper that the magazines would be printed on. That would help with accuracy.

3. If they cannot match their proof then something is wrong on their end.

4. If they do 2 and 3 and there is still problems, why not have them come in and look at your process? There could be something that your designer is doing that is messing the files up after the 2nd round. Never hurts to make sure your process is correct.

5. Maybe extend the budget on 1 of your projects and have another printer do a small run for you with the whole process. 2 rounds of proofing, all of that. If they have a problem too, then maybe it is on your end. If they match their proof and the color is correct, then you should probably be looking for another printer (probably that printer).

 

[SBD]

Thanks for the questions

1. we switched due to the other printer being in Canada, prints costs were much higher and shipping costs super high so it was mostly a cost and carbon footprint issue. We are a not for profit. (I personally did not want to change printers and we had such great customer service and very personalized attention. I personally would call the press guys when I saw issues!!)

2. Ok, so we can ask them to proof on the actual paper the magazine is printed on? I just thought it was kinda standard to send proofs on nice pretty heavy stock paper that makes proofs look really pretty

3. Well, that is my thought about the proof matching even though I feel inept in my knowledge. I am not blind to logic...I am fully fine with taking "blame" if it is an issue on this end, but it just does not logically look right to me. And at this point I am unclear why bother to proof if they can't even get close.

4. We are considering that very option of having them come here to eliminate or mitigate any issue on this end that could contribute to the problem

5. Not sure if that is an option but I will bring it up and it is a great idea.

Thanks!

 

[AP90]

2. Ok, so we can ask them to proof on the actual paper the magazine is printed on? I just thought it was kinda standard to send proofs on nice pretty heavy stock paper that makes proofs look really pretty

Thanks!

Sorry, I kind of misspoke. You will most likely not get the EXACT paper, as you have the difference in rolls of inkjet paper vs sheetfed/web rolls. But they should be using a paper that is VERY similar to what the final paper is. At minimum the paper should have the same brightness' and should match if the final product is gloss, matte, uncoated, etc. So id look at that. There could honestly be so many problems its hard to narrow it down, but Id start here. The less variables, the easier it is to pinpoint the problem.