X-rite iO UV cut filter or not

[jbarrie]

We are using the GMG color management system and located at the proof control station, we have a UV cut filter on our X-rite iO. Can someone explain to me what the benefits of a UV filter are apposed to a non-UV cut filter?

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

 

[Correct Color]

Jeff,

Some papers have "optical brighteners" in them, which--in very shorthand form--the UV cut iOne attempts to compensate for. "Attempts" is the operative word though, since there's just a "one-size-fits-all" filter in the device and the issue is far from that simple.

You can get any end of advice, argument and opinion on this subject, and there are much more robust optical brightener compensators available with higher-end devices such as the Isis.

For what it's worth, in actual every-day use with hand-helds, I prefer to use non UV-cut devices, but unless you've got a very specialized and critical application, frankly, you'll probably never see a difference between the two.


Mike Adams
Correct Color

 

[jbarrie]

Thanks

Thanks

Mike,
Thanks for your comments. here is my dilemma, Our sister company has another workstation with a non-UV cut filter and I have the ability of switching with them if I want too. What can I do with a non-UV iO that I couldn't do with the UV one. In other words, should I make the switch and for what reasons.

Thanks,
Jeff

 

[Correct Color]

If it were me, I'd make the switch just because I'd prefer to use a non-UV cut device. But do keep in mind that's my opinion. There are others out there who well might argue otherwise.

As to what you can do with one or the other, they're absolutely interchangeable.


Mike

(Edited to add: One thing you might check, if you're not too familiar with iOnes. If one is a Rev A and one is a Rev D--turn the device over and look at the tag--regardless of which is UV cut or otherwise, go for the rev D.)

 

[gordo]

I agree with Mike.

It's not really a question of what you can do with a non-UV vs the UV one.

It's more a question of getting some degree of instrument agreement if you are comparing your readings to a sister plant or to industry specs. Instrument agreement is hard enough to achieve even when everyone is using the exact same instrument model. Why add another variable?

If the instrument has a UV cut filter then it will report significantly different values when measuring optically brightened papers (the majority of papers being printed on) and through overprint coatings and laminates on optically brightened paper than an instrument without a UV cut filter.

One simple argument I've heard is that: we see the effect of optical brightners - so why would you cut it?

best, gordon p

 

[conger]

"One simple argument I've heard is that: we see the effect of optical brightners - so why would you cut it?"

The problem is that devices see the effect of the optical brighteners differently than our eyes do. We see the paper as brighter and whiter, the spectrophotometer sees it as more blue (in simplified terms).
I agree with the idea of matching apples and apples with your sister company. Don't do things differently.
We have had success without UV cut filters. Occasionally we have to edit the white point of an ICC profile to compensate for the effect of the OBA in the paper.

Will Conger

 

[Eric van der Kop]

A lot off thinks have been said. But what are you doing with the iO.
Making profiles, yes. Do you want these profiles to work ffor a graphical standard?
The the iO eye-one without UV cut is prefferred. If you look e.g. at Ugra/Fogra certification fot ISO12647-2 or 7 you see that measurement is always done without UV cut.

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

Why not measure the same target with both devices and you will see how different they are?
My experience tells me that or a proofing flow, or if you want to monitor changes you will probably want to use your own measuring device. No point monitoring with an off-site device. The more complicated QC is the more the risk that it will be bypassed.

I would advise for site to site consistency, decide which is your "master" instrument (and measuring environment)
For on site day to day monitoring, proofing and QC use the device you have at your site.

Remember there is a limit to what an iO can measure, and you may want to invest in another "master".

 

[Bob_McC]

Change in ISO 3664 suggests no UV cut measurements

Change in ISO 3664 suggests no UV cut measurements

Based on the recent change to the ISO 3664 standard for color viewing (2000 --> 2009) I believe that you will want to include UV in your measurements.

The new ISO standard (3664:2009) carries forward all of the primary targets and tolerances for specifications of the lighting environment used for critical color comparisons with one big exception. The new standard calls for a much closer match to the UV portion of the CIE D50 spectrum. Prior to this standard, no viewing systems in general use had enough UV energy to meet this new requirement (MIuv <1.5).

GTI has reformulated our lamp phosphors in order to meet this new specification and the result is more UV energy falling on the image than before. Other manufacturers (Waldmann, Sylvania, etc.) have developed new lamps to meet this spec.

What this means is that you will be seeing more of the effect of OBA's and other UV reactive elements in your viewing booth as the new standard proliferates.

As Gordan says, if its is in the image (eg OBA's), you are better of being able to see it than not. The overall goal is to improve the correlation between the visual appearance of an image and the predicted appearance based on measurements.

Bob McCurdy -GTI Graphic Technology, Inc.