Sales Strategies

[Alith7]

And we are right back to quality in print, with the use of the profiles...!!!

Which Fogra did he use? 27 or 39?

Adobe's Fogra27 profile is the standard factory defaut profile in french Adobe suites since CS3.
It's not exactly a real Fogra27, it is an Adobe "creation" based on the Fogra27 specifications with some simplifications... and I wonder what the Adobe ingineers did smoke when they created that piece of ***** because it basically doesn't respect the standard specifications of offset printing (TAC=350%, Max black value=100%), giving some troubles to printers...
Sadly, as it is the factory defaut profile in Photoshop CS3 and 4, all the people that are not enough aware of colour managing to change the profile made unprintable CMYK pictures, with to much ink coverage and to much black... it was a big mess for french printers!!!


I quit this job with a CS4, but I have heard, without being able to confirm, that newer CS (5 or 6) sold in France use a better profile based on Fogra39 as factory defaut profile... and that's the first version where Adobe has set a correct factory defaut profile...

... since all previous versions had a bad profile inadapted to offset printing in France:
- first, a SWOP profile made for US specifications, with US inks... although french printers use european inks (slightly different of US inks) and different ways to copy plates (giving a different dot gain).
- then an "Euroscale Coated v2", with a TAC=350%...
- then the Adobe's Fogra27, THE piece of crap: TAC=350%, Max black value=100%, and a magenta colour dominant...

See..we didn't get off topic...much.

I don't remember which. I just know he was looking to print some media pieces with 4-color B&W photos because he wanted the depth in the shadows, but was concerned about the the highlights getting off-color. We were working on a special quad-tone CMYK curve the faded to pure K under 30% (I think that's what we decided). he was sending me PDf proofs to look at and I was running into problems because every time i'd try to look at the seps in Acrobat, the shadows were pure K and the highlights were CMYK. I was looking at it with SWOP profile for the rendering. once I switched to FOGRA, it did a full 180. weirdest thing i've ever seen.

If that's what you have to deal with, and never knowing what rendering intent is being used...UG! Hats off to then! In the US, Adobe is usually default to SWOP, which is what is generally used anyways (at least around here) so it's not generally an issue.

 

[Deleted member 16349]

See..we didn't get off topic...much.

The original topic was "Sales Strategies".

Maybe that is a strategy. When the customer comes in, scare them with Colour Management issues and history. It sure scares me.

 

[pcmodem]

Going back to the use of quality. Quality is very subjective, just like color. If we are to use a term, it needs to be definable.

Free from manufacturing defects
Consistent color
Finished to the correct size
Assembled correctly (for kits or die cut pieces)
Shipped in the customer preferred method which includes boxing

I am sure there are other items which can be added to this list. I tried to present an overall list which should encompass smaller items.

 

[gordo]

Going back to the use of quality. Quality is very subjective, just like color. If we are to use a term, it needs to be definable.

Well actually, from a presswork point of view, System Brunner (as one example) has a methodology to make determining print "quality" objective.
It is indeed possible to make determining print "quality" objective - however there is no industry drive to actually implement objective quality standards so, no progress takes place.

gordo

 

[Alith7]

Well actually, from a presswork point of view, System Brunner (as one example) has a methodology to make determining print "quality" objective.
It is indeed possible to make determining print "quality" objective - however there is no industry drive to actually implement objective quality standards so, no progress takes place.

gordo

isn't that what they were attempting with the the whole Idealliance process, and G7 implementation? I know the focus was more on color consistency than tackling the whole system, but it seemed like a good place to start...

 

[Deleted member 16349]

isn't that what they were attempting with the the whole Idealliance process, and G7 implementation? I know the focus was more on color consistency than tackling the whole system, but it seemed like a good place to start...

Just my personal view. The whole G7 effort, which might be marginally better than the tone target methods, does not ensure colour consistency and is an unfortunate distraction from the industry developing methods that are needed to actually predict printed colour.

The industry does not seem to be able to think through what is required to make predictable printed colour. So instead they hype faulty approaches. It is clear there is no mathematical path being used in these existing methods to obtain a result in predictable colour. Hype existing methods a lot and make people think that it is their fault that they are not getting good results.

Again it is my personal view that the industry does not understand how to approach problems and obtain practical, effective and easy to use methods. Just my view.

 

[gordo]

isn't that what they were attempting with the the whole Idealliance process, and G7 implementation? I know the focus was more on color consistency than tackling the whole system, but it seemed like a good place to start...

No. And it wasn't about color consistency either. I was at most of the G7 press runs as well as many of the Idealliance meetings around that initiative. I resigned from the organization as a result of seeing how they went about developing the process. One good thing though is that it brought awareness of ISO to US printers.

Gordo

 

[gordo]

Just my personal view. The whole G7 effort, which might be marginally better than the tone target methods, does not ensure colour consistency and is an unfortunate distraction from the industry developing methods that are needed to actually predict printed colour.

The industry does not seem to be able to think through what is required to make predictable printed colour. So instead they hype faulty approaches. It is clear there is no mathematical path being used in these existing methods to obtain a result in predictable colour. Hype existing methods a lot and make people think that it is their fault that they are not getting good results.

Again it is my personal view that the industry does not understand how to approach problems and obtain practical, effective and easy to use methods. Just my view.

This issue will probably be rendered moot with inkjet presses.
As far as offset is concerned, there is one company that could do it (Heidelberg) however (based on my experience at Creo) I don't believe there is an ROI in developing the technology. Companies rarely green light the development if new products or services unless there is a strong business/economic case for making the investment. They don't develop anything based just on market need.

Gordo

 

[Deleted member 16349]

This issue will probably be rendered moot with inkjet presses.
As far as offset is concerned, there is one company that could do it (Heidelberg) however (based on my experience at Creo) I don't believe there is an ROI in developing the technology. Companies rarely green light the development if new products or services unless there is a strong business/economic case for making the investment. They don't develop anything based just on market need.

Gordo

I could be wrong but I wouldn't think Heidelberg was the right company since what I have been referring to is pre press technology. I see it as more of a mathematical and engineering problem. Academics should be a group that should bring this together but in this industry, they don't have the skills, knowledge or smarts to do anything outside the normal practice.

I suspect some small company could develop things to lead the way if they have the right people. It does not require a lot of investment, just better thinking. It is not a matter of creating lots of new knowledge but in applying known knowledge in the right direction. Developing theoretical approaches is a very low cost approach and in the end results in the most practical solutions.

Will it happen, probably not.

 

[gordo]

I could be wrong but I wouldn't think Heidelberg was the right company since what I have been referring to is pre press technology.

I said Heidelberg because they own all the components of the productions system from input, workflow, color management, plate imaging, press and press controls. They have the greatest potential for fully integrating it all.

Will it happen, probably not.

I agree.

gordo

 

[Deleted member 16349]

I said Heidelberg because they own all the components of the productions system from input, workflow, color management, plate imaging, press and press controls. They have the greatest potential for fully integrating it all.

gordo

That makes sense but it does not seem in Heidelberg's DNA to be interested in change. Refinement yes but not change.

What I would say is that the multi billion dollar companies such as Donnelley, Transcontinental, Quad Graphics and others would not spend a cent to investigate other ideas. They are the ones that have let the industry down.

The industry is not conservative, it is cheap. It is intellectually lazy and expects their suppliers to come up with the answers. This is very sad and incredibly dumb.

The large printing companies are in a very interesting position. The large printing companies have a large amount of offset technology spread all over the country and even the world. The same problems and faults in the process exist in all these presses and prepress systems supporting them.

Understanding these weaknesses and fixing them would have a tremendous leverage affect because the small amount of resources to investigate the problems can be applied to practical solutions over a very wide area. A few problems solved and applied to a large number of operations. That kind of leverage does not happen often in manufacturing.

Instead no one wants to do anything different and they chose to do basically what every one else does. The result is the pressure to lower margins to compete for work. Competition by attrition and not by innovation is a sure sign that things are not positive for an industry.

I see potential but I don't see hope for an industry that wants to do the same things as before. Not happy with that view.

 

[cmcolorprinting01]

Totally agree with your idea.

Sometimes lower price do not always mean low quality. But most of the time, it does. Every single object has its value, for example, the book can be printed in different paper with different value. I am not trying to say you guys can not buy the printing products in low price. But at least you should know the value of what the manufacturers offer to you!

If pricing becomes an issue during a sale, I normally end-up explaining to the prospective customer (not only about printing, but also mail, programming and fulfillment projects): "We are NOT the cheapest in town, but, we ARE the best. If you want it done right with exceptional quality, then we're your best shot. If it's just about the cheapest price where quality and accuracy is not an issue, then, you probably should look elsewhere."

Main Reason: The long-range damage that you will do to your company's reputation by putting out sub-quality, but, inexpensive, work will far outweigh the revenue that you would generate by lowering your standards. In other words, if you have sub-quality pieces circulating out there, other prospective customers who notice will not know, or care, that it is sub-quality because it was cheap, only that it is sub-quality. "Who printed this? I just want to make sure they NEVER print anything for me......."

In instances where we've lost a sale because of this line of thinking, we usually end up getting it back anyway to correct the mistakes that the "cheap" company made, and, sometimes higher than the originally agreed-upon price.

-Best

MailGuru

 

[maas]

Anyone who has gone through he process of gaining entry to the IFRA quality club will understand the definition of "quality" in print, for our sites I have set out to define the concept of quality in offset printing as managing to keep the ink film within 0.05 density variance and the dot gain within 1% of the ISO 12647-3:2004 standard, (I take the ability to keep the web in register etc as a given so this is not measured)

Every copy we produce is analysed and reported on a weekly basis, yes it takes time to implement, to get buy in from staff and there is a cost purchasing the Xrite densitometers but its well worth the effort, we virtually eliminated credits due to inconsistent printing as well as retained clients even when these were offered better prices, in terms of the bottom line our ink spend was approximately 2 million per year, when this project was started we over inked 37% of all our work to various degrees, last year our ink bill was reduced by 220k despite our tonnage increasing.

To me quality in print is defined as having a mathematical reference to your process, which in offset is putting an ink film on paper measured in density, we do not create colour (this is a prepress function) using densitometry as our measure of quality has removed any subjective arguments on this subject as we print to numbers, its that simple.

regards

Maas

 

[tangtang]

hi i am david from china.
After read the topic, i get a lot and thanks.

I think find the mistakes and correct them are right.
Anyone can accept it.
We must do.
Because we are the speciall one in the printing, some printer is lower than us,Especially in details.
Of course, we can correct the mistake as the advice way.
Sometimes, the customer get angry, not for the mistake, but for our way.
Our customer also have manythings solved every day.