Rampage and Epson G7 Proofing

[markb]

Hi, we are installing a new Komori press and reworking our workflow for G7. Our old workflow was "custom" due to the older 2004 Komori and Rampage profiles for color Epson proofing.

We are upgrading to Rampage v12 and purchasing Color Path Sync ( ColorPath Sync | ColorPath (Taskero Universe) | Consultative Services | Graphic Arts & Printing | Fujifilm USA ) for Rampage plate curve management.

We are looking to have G7 Epson proofing that is "easy" to maintain in the sense that to output accurate proofs each week, we do not have to have much extra time investment. We do not have color experts on staff.

So, we have a proposal for Oris color tuner and a new Epson 9900 with built-in Spectrophotometer. The cost for this bundle is not exactly inexpensive. The alternative is to have the vendor's color expert build a Rampage profile and use our current Epson 9800.

Our color proofing workflow right now is Espon 9800 and three profiles in Rampage: gloss, dull and uncoated.

My questions are:

1. Our vendor says that they do not recommend to build three proof options of gloss, dull and uncoated. They are saying that for G7, we should have one proof and train our customers on the difference of paper when printing. What are others doing on this topics?

2. Is Oris Color Tuner the way to go? We can save some cash by not upgrading to the Epson 9900, but we would then need to scan proofs to make sure they are where they need to be for G7- I am not sure PP dept. will do this on all the proofs. Any feedback on this software or alternatives would be great.

Thanks

 

[rich apollo]

We are upgrading to Rampage v12 and purchasing Color Path Sync ( ColorPath Sync | ColorPath (Taskero Universe) | Consultative Services | Graphic Arts & Printing | Fujifilm USA ) for Rampage plate curve management.

For curves only? Taskero seems like overkill and I've heard criticisms of its curve generation.

We are looking to have G7 Epson proofing that is "easy" to maintain in the sense that to output accurate proofs each week, we do not have to have much extra time investment. We do not have color experts on staff.

One of your group needs to take ownership of this. No product will get around the need for knowledge.

So, we have a proposal for Oris color tuner and a new Epson 9900 with built-in Spectrophotometer. The cost for this bundle is not exactly inexpensive. The alternative is to have the vendor's color expert build a Rampage profile and use our current Epson 9800.

Oris works well. I don't recommend driving proofers with RIPping/trapping front-ends, like Rampage. You'll have greater success with a proofing RIP.

1. Our vendor says that they do not recommend to build three proof options of gloss, dull and uncoated. They are saying that for G7, we should have one proof and train our customers on the difference of paper when printing. What are others doing on this topics?

I disagree with your vendor. I think that you should at least proof specifically for coated and uncoated. For dull, you'd have to test.

2. Is Oris Color Tuner the way to go? We can save some cash by not upgrading to the Epson 9900, but we would then need to scan proofs to make sure they are where they need to be for G7- I am not sure PP dept. will do this on all the proofs. Any feedback on this software or alternatives would be great.

Oris works well, but it's not the only game in town. There are many RIPs to choose from that will accomplish your proofing goals and will take advantage of the Spectroproofer. Unless you're wanting to stick pass/fail stickers on proofs, Prepress doesn't need to measure each proof.

From what you've said, I take it you're in a shop that uses Fuji consumables. I like Fuji's plates - have had very good experiences with them, and have had good experiences with their sales force. That being said, take some time to shop around a little. I can envision what I expect are more economical solutions that would do everything you want.

 

[gordo]

Please use the correct terms.
G7 is a methodology for grey balance - it is not a specification of a print (or proofer) characteristic/target.

Gordo

 

[markb]

Thank you for the feedback, it has been helpful.