XCMYK and/or DMAXX profiling software

[curiosity]

Recently attempted to create a DMAXX icc profile, but to no avail. My software (admittedly dated...PrintOpen v4...oky, waaaay dated!) seems not to be capable of the task.
When measuring printed targets, nearly all patches are accompanied with the warning of "significant declinations".
The resulting profile, when viewed with the ColorSync Utility, shows a misshapen 3D color space.
Would anyone here know why that is?

Meanwhile, I'll resort to downloading Idealliance's XCMYK profile.

 

[gordo]

Out of curiosity... what SIDS are you running at?

 

[curiosity]

Managed to get 200, 165, 165, and 130 on 100lb CS2 text

 

[gordo]

Managed to get 200, 165, 165, and 130 on 100lb CS2 text

Here's a comparison:

Standard SIDs

K: 1.70, C: 1.40, M: 1.50, Y: 1.05

Your SIDs

K: 2.00, C: 1.65, M: 1.65, Y: 1.30

XCMYK SIDs

K: 2.0, C: 1.85, M 1.85, Y: 1.20

In my experience, and keeping in mind I was not involved with Idealliance's XCMYK

There is no need to go to 2.00 with K since K is achromatic so that does not add gamut. But you're on target for XCMYK's profile.

You are 20 points low for C and M compared to XCMYK so you won't quite hit the gamut in their profile. In practical terms though, the difference is probably quite small and may not be visible in press work. The C and M SIDs are the same which is in line with XCMYK. From my point of view that's odd (due to ink trapping)
Your Y SID is higher than XCMY, that and the difference in the C and M SIDs may make a visible difference in your secondary colors (RGB).

 

[curiosity]

After measuring targets used to create curves, I too thought we could have increased the C & M SIDs. Also, I was surprised the Y was able to go so high. And I agree that K hasn't much impact on the overall goal of extended gamut, but what the heck, how far could we go is what I focused on.
Thanks for the input.
At this point, I'll continue to troubleshoot my software, ask a friend to measure my target with his software, and use the XCMYK profile while keeping in mind the documented SIDs from Idealliance XCMYK.

 

[arossetti]

Xrite iprofiler isn't that expensive, $1200 or so right?

 

[gordo]

After measuring targets used to create curves, I too thought we could have increased the C & M SIDs. Also, I was surprised the Y was able to go so high. And I agree that K hasn't much impact on the overall goal of extended gamut, but what the heck, how far could we go is what I focused on.
Thanks for the input.
At this point, I'll continue to troubleshoot my software, ask a friend to measure my target with his software, and use the XCMYK profile while keeping in mind the documented SIDs from Idealliance XCMYK.

The key thing as far as SIDs are concerned is that the press is stable at those densities and that you don't have issues such as "tailing" or "slinging", offsetting, or scumming. Use your USB microscope to confirm the integrity of the halftone dots.

Attached is a chart showing SIDs relative to ink film thickness. Most printshops that I've visited run their presses about 10-15 points lower than the traditional SID targets so going to this density can be quite scary (but enlightening).

 

[curiosity]

Actually used your info while preparing for this test. We got to a place during the test that was good enough for initial discovery.
To further that discovery, I'm currently going with XCMYK profile that I downloaded.
I'm pretty sure my software isn't up to snuff. Could be something else, but for now I'd like to see print results.
Then we can decide to continue with extended gamut, or not, or a little of both.

 

[curiosity]

Define Brain Fart.
My definition would be when you scan a target into your spectrophotometer backwards!
Case solved!!
BTW, the results of my little DMAXX experiment were wonderful when compared side by side to normal SIDs. Contrast, detail, color abound.
Pressmen are justifiably concerned that running at such high density will cause issues, not least of which is the hissing sound from the ink train.

 

[Ferran]

Hi all,

My post does not answer the original question, but for your info and just in case you have some “curiosity” ... The pic that I have attached to the post shows the SIDs values we were running when we produced a book with the XCMYK 2017.icc profile from Idealliance. The inks used were from Siegwerk (H-UV Perfect) printing on a Komori Lithrone G40 with H-UV drying system. Note that the densities in the picture (K: 1,95 – C: 1,95 – M: 1,65 – Y: 1,65) are expressed with Status-E, and not using the Status-T filter/response which is the accepted standard in the US. Also keep in mind that the whitepaper from Idealliance says: "the densities may be used as a rough guide to setting ink levels. The Lab values are more exact."

Here I share with you the average CIELAB dE2000 we got for the primaries:

C: ΔE00 3,40
M: ΔE00 2,60
Y: ΔE00 3,20
K: ΔE00 1.70

 

[curiosity]

Thanks Ferran. Good info. My previous post meant to say that I answered my own original question.