Prepressforums.com

MatthewO · #1 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 09:26 AM

I am new in the prepress world and the shop I have come into is pretty behind the times (when I mentioned power protection and UPSs, they asked what shipping had to do with anything!). I won't even say what the senior prepress woman said about the "magic" of email...

To the point...

We have set up a very sound color management system (BEST) for our Heidelberg Quickmaster DI. Everyone is very happy with the results. Additionally, management is now asking for a more accurate system for our spot color jobs. Of course, they're all about the lowest price and the quickest solution.

I don't know where to look or what to look for?

Help for this newbie?

clod · #2 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 11:01 AM

Are you looking for a proofing device that would better simulate spot colors, or a new digital press that will support spot colors?

MatthewO · #3 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 11:06 AM

There are days when I think I am a real dunce...

Spot PMS colors are what the hub-bub is all about. We're looking for a solution that will accurately output PMS colors...

clod · #4 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 11:32 AM

Quote:

We're looking for a solution that will accurately output PMS colors...

Well, if your talking about a Digital press, I know there is a 5 or 6 color Speedmaster DI out there, but man, its gotta be expensive 8O . I don't know jack about digital presses, so your on your own there.

You mentioned Best...are you using an inkjet with your Best Rip for proofing...(you're not running you QuickMaster DI with it are you)? For proofing, the Best Rip should support PMS simulation. I can't comment on how accurate it it renders them though...probably pretty decent depending on the printer. With an Epson 4000/76/96/10600 and a GMG Rip, we can dial in spot colors to the lowest possible delta E fairly easily, the only limit is the gamut of the printer versus a given PMS color. Greens and Oranges tend to be the most poorly simulated as they are way outside the gamut of the printer.

MatthewO · #5 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 11:35 AM

We're currently using an HP DesignJet 10ps. It is producing solid results for the QMDI, but can be bounce between PMS simulation and process relatively swiftly?

clod · #6 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 11:51 AM

Quote:

We're currently using an HP DesignJet 10ps. It is producing solid results for the QMDI, but can be bounce between PMS simulation and process relatively swiftly?

I don't see why not...it's not even a matter of "bouncing" between the two if I understand you correctly. You should be able to output 5/c, 6/c, or whatever proofs, either PMS with process or entirely PMS. It's not like you put different ink cartridges in or anything. The Best Rip will simply utilize the full gamut of the printer to simulate the PMS colors rather than a limited gamut to simulate 4/c printing (at least that's how GMG handles it, and I'd be suprised if Best was much different). But if your destination is still CMYK with the QMDI, there's not much point in using spot colors in your proof. Are you able to put PMS inks in the QMDI? (told ya I didn't know jack about digital presses)

MatthewO · #7 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 12:18 PM

You can put PMS inks in our QMDI, but that would be like having a deisel lawn mower. Sure it would work, but... Especially since ours is only a four-color press.

I understand that it will be a CMYK or six ink conversion of the PMS color. It is just the fact that none of the proofing methods we've used thus far has produced acceptable results.

I will contact our vendor for the BEST proofer.

I had been looking at the 4000 for some time, hmmm.

Clod, thanks for the help!

clod · #8 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 12:54 PM

For spot color rendering, the actual proofer is only part of it. The software that drives is really the key to how accurate the simulation will be.

This year, the IPA Color Proofing Roundup had a section on spot color evaluation. Some participants used the same printer (Epson 7600 for example) and got very different results (in this case, the EFI/Best Rip was actually not quite the "best"). If you want to check the results for yourself, you can order it here ...

http://www.ipa.org/webinars/04roundup.php3

The results are not free, but its probably the only non-biased evaluation of the many different systems out there.

Lammy · #9 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 06:10 PM

I thought the QMDI used conventional inks like the non DI presses??

Cory · #10 (**permalink**) 09-09-2004, 08:02 PM

QMDI uses waterless inks..