The PANTONE Goe System

[Anthony]

I am surprised that no one has been talking about [Pantone's Goe matching system|http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/Pantone.aspx?pg=20494&ca=10]. Has anyone started talks at their company on how they will handle the new 2058 colors that pantone will be releasing on October 1st? I know this was the announcement was made September 5th, but I just found out today after receiving an email from Pantone.

This post is just to see what other people's opinions are on the new system and how they feel it will effect their workflow in the next year.

 

[meddington]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

Most proofing systems will likely have a data base upgrade for this in the short term (if not already). I personally think the Pantone Goe system will take a good long while to catch on with our clients, so until them, we'll take it one color at a time.

There was some brief discussion here in the sheetfed section
http://printplanet.com/discuss/thread.jspa?threadID=283&tstart=0

 

[gianotten]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

Yes, in the sheetfed/web offset section I gave my observations on Pantone 2.0. I made a mistake (typo) in the subject line so it reads Patone instead of Pantone. Sorry.
I hope that the moderator will correct that typo!

 

[Cory Smith]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

Fixed the typo...in the future, if you ever need me to fix anything, you can just report the post (click on the yellow caution symbol) and I will take care of it.
thanks

 

[print goddess1]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

Since we have no knowledge, on the design production side, of what this is going to mean, we can't do anything in advance. Presumably, Adobe and Quark will have to provide updates, which we will have to purchase.

We are also waiting to hear if the commercial printers will need other information from us, or will simply convert our current brand colors to the new numbers.

A number of us are getting very nostalgic already for the PMS 287 Blue which never dries or PMS 348 The Color of Money Green.

The new numbers can't possibly have the same mystique, can they?


One can't help but wonder if this is because 4-color is kicking PMS inks out of the playing field and that no one has bought a new PMS book in years.

 

[Anthony]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

As I understand this is not a replacement to the old system just an addition.

So there will be no need to "convert our current brand colors to the new numbers". You will also still have your 287 and 348. Now you will just have 2058 *MORE* colors to play with.

My company does not print using Pantone colors, we use large format inkjets and lambda machines, as we do large trade show graphics. I currently match the colors from the pantone library to our printers so that our customers get consistant results, now I just have 2058 more colors to match to each printer. YAY!:_|

 

[lmahal]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

That is incorrect. The old numbers are not in Goe.
Here is an article by Gene Gable that goes a great job of reviewing the goe system.

http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/25871.html

Especially interesting is his last couple of paragraphs.

The Bottom Line
In the end, it's only a color-matching system, not a religion, though I have heard designers refer to their Pantone books in reverential tones. As technology continues to change, so will the need for choosing colors. Pantone doesn't own the colors, just the names. A 45-4-7 rose, by any other name, is still red.

As far as the value of the new Goe system, $499 may seem like a lot to pay for a couple of binders full of color swatches. But that's a moderate price for a professional piece of software these days, and I think most designers will tell you they use their Pantone books as much as they do most software. And what piece of software do you know of that is upgraded only every 45 years?

I know many of you will be sorry to discover the Pantone numbers you know by heart will soon mark your age, not your knowledge. You may also be less than pleased that now you can specify almost twice as many colors that won't reproduce accurately in CMYK or in most proofing systems.

But then there's that attractive plastic cube, all those beautiful colors, and something called a Palette Playground. Who can resist that? And wisely, Pantone left completely intact the most important feature of any color-matching system: "Blame it on the printer."

Ain't it the truth...
Lonn-

 

[Anthony]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

_{color:#0000ff}Lonn Mahal{color} :_+_"That is incorrect. The old numbers are not in Goe."_+


I never said they were in Goe, I said they weren't being replaced. They are still keeping the old system alive.

"Pantone claims that the GOE system does NOT replace the existing PMS
system. So both will exist. Obviously, Pantone wants people to use the
GOE system...but the PMS system isn't going away." - [Mordy Golding (Real World Illustrator)|http://rwillustrator.blogspot.com/2007/09/go-goe-pantone.html|Mordy Golding's article on Goe]

Andy

 

[lmahal]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

I see what you meant now. I misinterpreted what you meant. Sorry.
I think PMS will have a long life in packaging, but for commercial, I think it's going to get a bit messy.
I have been fielding customer inquiries already as to when we will be ready to support it, and it's not released yet!

Lonn-

 

[pmhapp]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

Interestingly, at Graph Expo it was announced that Adobe has not yet agreed to support Goe.

 

[disbellj]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

If we can't match a lot of these colors in 4C process print (what most customers choose), then what's the use? Why don't I just go with MetalFX instead and have many more colors that I can print? Just because PANTONE numbers their colors doesn't mean that much, especially since judging colors by Lab values and appearance on monitor are becoming more the norm. And I guess the reason I've not bought PANTONE books in a while is because I got the PANTONE-provided Lab values, I got the PANTONE-provided color bridge CMYK values, I have color management and can make my own CMYK values from PANTONE Lab values, and I can print my own proof, which will be as close as one of their printed "guides" (which don't even match PANTONE's own given Lab values I've seen at times and my proof can be closer since I'm making the CMYK values for my specific printing condition and PANTONE's color bridge numbers are not even printed to GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 nor ISOcoatedv2, the most prominent specifications of the international standard ISO 12647-2).

Don

 

[Anthony]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

I received my GoeGuide today. Anyone else jump in and get any of the Goe stuff?

 

[stargate]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

No

 

[esadsuskic]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

Hi Don,

You mentioned: "I got the PANTONE-provided Lab values". Where did you get those?

Thanks!

Esad Suskic

 

[Printologist]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

We blogged a bit about Goe.

[Pantone Goe Technical Mess|http://lifeofprint.com/?p=9]
Sep 26, 2007, 11:00 PM
by Printologist
I would have never believed you if you had told me that PMS would be replaced by Goe (pronounced “go”). The first thing I was taught when I first worked in a printing environment, over a decade ago, was the important of the PMS (Pantone Matching System) to manage color. At the time color matching [[...]|http://lifeofprint.com/?p=9]]

[HP Indigo support Pantone’s new Goe|http://lifeofprint.com/?p=10]
Sep 28, 2007, 11:08 AM
by Printologist
I noticed from this Press Release HP is supporting the Pantone’s new Goe color system–making HP the early adopter in the Digital Press world. You can tell I expected this from my earlier post. There are three ways they can achieve this (although the article only highlights two). The two ways they mention in the article [[..]|http://lifeofprint.com/?p=10]]

 

[disbellj]

Re: The PANTONE Goe System

To get PANTONE Lab values for their colors, I went into Photoshop, clicked the Foreground color swatch, clicked Color Libraries, chose Book: PANTONE solid coated, type in a color number (such as PANTONE Reflex Blue C), and get the Lab values (the look of that color that we want to match as close as possible in any given printing condition, in this case with PANTONE Reflex Blue C it says L: 19, a: 26, b: -68).

But we can't match this color in CMYK. I can try though to get as close as I can. And what profile I choose or program I choose to make the profile I use makes all the difference. Let's prove it.
First, I set my rendering intent in color settings to Absolute Colorimetric Intent and my Info window's second color readout to Lab color (so that the Lab values I'm looking at in the Info window are always printed Lab values).
Second, I make a new Lab document and fill with the Lab values of PANTONE Reflex Blue C, which is L: 19, a: 26, b: -68.
Third, I duplicate this document multiple times.
I keep one document as Lab with the correct Lab values in it.
I convert each of the duplicates using different rendering intents and profiles, each giving different results.

GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (official profile by X-Rite), Perceptual, BPC on or off = CMYK 100,84,2,28 and Lab 24,6,-36
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (official profile by X-Rite), Saturation, BPC on = CMYK 100,92,0,2 and Lab 26,13,-46
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (official profile by X-Rite), Saturation, BPC off = CMYK 100,93,0,2 and Lab 26,14,-46
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (official profile by X-Rite), Relative Colorimetric, BPC on = CMYK 100,87,4,18 and Lab 25,8,-39
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (official profile by X-Rite), Relative Colorimetric, BPC off = CMYK 100,86,3,25 and Lab 24,7,-37
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2 (official profile by X-Rite), Absolute Colorimetric = CMYK 100,85,3,21 and Lab 24,7,-38

Now that's just the possible results from using one CMYK profile. Here other results, each using the same characterization data but different programs to make the CMYK profile I'm converting to. All these profiles are made by different programs, so give different CMYK results from the same Lab color, even when using the same rendering intent.

GRACoL2006_Coated1_GCR_bas (by colormanagement.org using basICColor), Perceptual, BPC on or off = CMYK 100,88,0,0 and Lab 27,12,-46
GRACoL2006_Coated1_GCR_bas (by colormanagement.org using basICColor), Saturation, BPC on or off = CMYK 100,86,0,0 and Lab 28,11,-46
GRACoL2006_Coated1_GCR_bas (by colormanagement.org using basICColor), Relative Colorimetric, BPC on or off = CMYK 100,89,0,0 and Lab 27,13,-46
GRACoL2006_Coated1_GCR_bas (by colormanagement.org using basICColor), Absolute Colorimetric = CMYK 100,88,0,0 and Lab 27,12,-46

GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Perceptual, BPC on = CMYK 99,98,0,6 and Lab 24,16,-43
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Perceptual, BPC off = CMYK 98,98,1,8 and Lab 24,16,-42
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Saturation, BPC on = CMYK 99,98,0,6 and Lab 24,16,-43
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Saturation, BPC off = CMYK 98,98,1,8 and Lab 24,16,-42
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Relative Colorimetric, BPC on = CMYK 99,96,0,11 and Lab 23,14,-42
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Relative Colorimetric, BPC off = CMYK 98,99,1,16 and Lab 22,15,-40
GRACoL2006_Coated1v2_PerfX (PerfX Color Management Pro™), Absolute Colorimetric = CMYK 98,98,1,13 and Lab 23,15,-40

Now when we compare the results of these three GRACoL2006 ICC profiles, using all available combinations of rendering intents and BPC options, we see that GRACoL2006_Coated1_GCR_bas ICC profile made using basICColor by colormanagement.org gives about the same results no matter what rendering intent is used or if BPC is used or not. So the default rendering intent Relative Colorimetric Intent and BPC could be used and give the best results. This profile also gives the best (by far) reproduction of Reflex Blue on GRACoL2006_Coated1, when comparing these three ICC profiles.

So for PANTONE Goe colors (or any out-of-gamut colors to best be reproduced, no matter what rendering intent is chosen, or if BPC is chosen or not), this test has proven that it's going to have to happen in the making of the CMYK profile. This test shows that the program that makes the profile is all important. For me, this test has proven what ICC profiles I'll likely be using in the future, or at least what program I want to make the profiles I use.

If I wanted to test out uncoated and these profiles and the conversion I get, I can. Using the default Relative Colorimetric Intent with BPC on, I get:
ISOuncoated (by ECI.org) = CMYK 99,100,0,0 and Lab 39,8,-32
ISO Uncoated and uncoated_FOGRA29_GCR_bas (both by color management.org using basICColor) = CMYK 100,95,0,0 and Lab 39,7,-33
Uncoated FOGRA29 (ISO 12647-2-2004) (made by Adobe) = CMYK 100,79,29,4 and Lab 40,-2,-21

For uncoated, using the default rendering intent and BPC on gives results that could be better IMO, although the basICColor profile from colormanagement.org is still the best. All need improvement if possible (I can't even tell you what's going on with Adobe's uncoated 29 profile?!?!?)

Don