ISO 12647-7 Using inkjet Proofing

I attended the seminar of Ideal Marketing. The speaker was Vidhu Gotham.
He said that using Epson is the best inkjet proofing for the ISO 12647-7 certification. Some people asked about HP with spectrophotometer? He said, HP is also good and Kodak software support it. Sir Larry, any comment please.

Hi icc_user. Well it depends what you mean by "the best" proofer.

Mahirap sagutin ito unless we compare a specific model of Epson and compare it with a specific counterpart.

Not all Epsons are okay. Actually, many proofers produce a bronzing effect when viewed under normal lighting conditions. Which model are you talking about?

Kanya-kanya silang specialty. For example some Canon proofers have a much wider gamut on the green and yellow colors than Epson. Some Epsons would dominate the blues. Other HP models, especially the latter ones, are commended for having vibrant reds. After a while, all of them would correct their flaws and sooner or later everyone else end up with a big gamut that your press can't match!!! Sheesh!!!

Ewan ko lang, my colleagues and I give more weight on the RIP to be used for proofing. Equally important is the color management system that will tame the monster.

Actually, if budget permits, we're thinking of getting an EFI Colorproof XF with Color Verifier in the coming months. Sana matuloy.

Glad that you're still around icc_user. Matagal ka rin nawala sa forum.

Anyone can say that the Mercedes Benz is the best car in the world. But is it the best car for Taxi service?

It is difficult to make a sweeping statement that one particular brand of printer is better than other brands for proofing. A proofing system is a marriage between a printer and a rip. The performance of the system will depend on the particular model of both the printer and the rip. Oh, the proofing media is also a big factor.

My company supplies the EagleProof rip bundled with the Canon iPF printer; but I never make any claim that this system is better than the other brands. I leave it up to the customers to evaluate and decide based on their needs.

Hello everyone, base on my understanding, things to consider in proofing system are accuracy, consistency and repeatability. To achieve this goal, you must have a consistent system that includes a printer, software and a paper. Probably the speaker is basing on what printer has the most ISO certication posted by FOGRACERT which is epson and next is HP, was there a certification issued to Canon with thier new IPF? The three RIP SW like GMG, EFI, CGS and Kodak is using Epson, There are softwares out there that are good and can also achieved ISO like Posterjet but maybe for a reason they are not submitting for ISO certification

Hi Larry and CieCam!

Can you give your opinions on the IPA Color Assurance Evaluation Cert. How does this compare with FOGRACERT?

Thanks.

If its IPA then it refers to Gracol 7 norms just like IdeAlliance certification. Fogracert naman is based on ISO 12647-2 amd1 and ISO 12647-7. Both IPA and FOGRAcert aim points and tolerances are nearly identical. But I will still have to check.

"Like what sir larry said. The aim points are identical."it is because the Control strip being used by Gracol is also based on ISO 12647.

ISO student (Europe): 1 + 1 = 2
Gracol student (US): 4 - 2 = 2

Moral of the story.....East is East....West is West.

Assuming that we pass or attain the ISO proof standard... is there a local printer that can achieve the same in press offset print ??? Consistently???

To name a few....Triune Graphix, Summit, Velprint, Fortune and Printwell.

larrysison wrote:

To name a few....Triune Graphix, Summit, Velprint, Fortune and Printwell.

Hmmm.... interestingly Summit is implementing ISO standard - Velprint and Fortune are two of their printers (complying to the ISO standard as you say) so what about the other two... Jardis and House Printers? How can the public know if they conform to ISO, is there any certification?

One doesn't have to be PSO certified since it's not mandatory in the PI. It is in Europe.

But at least one has to show some sort of evidence that they are printing according to the quality standards such as ISO. This documentary proof consists of the paper L*a*b*, ink L*a*b* of the primaries and overprints, TVI curves, TVI midtone spread, and Gray Balance. To add it shows the overall gamut of the printer vis-a-vis with ISO.

If this is met and also if the standard illumination at the press console is being followed (ISO 3664; P1 viewing condition) then it SHOULD match the proof conforming to ISO 12647-7.

Any printer, certified or not, but has evidence that their products conform to ISO should might as well promote their quality system. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't.

larrysison wrote:

One doesn't have to be PSO certified since it's not mandatory in the PI. It is in Europe.

But at least one has to show some sort of evidence that they are printing according to the quality standards such as ISO. This documentary proof consists of the paper L*a*b*, ink L*a*b* of the primaries and overprints, TVI curves, TVI midtone spread, and Gray Balance. To add it shows the overall gamut of the printer vis-a-vis with ISO.

If this is met and also if the standard illumination at the press console is being followed (ISO 3664; P1 viewing condition) then it SHOULD match the proof conforming to ISO 12647-7.

Any printer, certified or not, but has evidence that their products conform to ISO should might as well promote their quality system. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't.

This is the missing ingredient ---> "paper L*a*b*" this part of the requirement is hard to come by in P. I. and the price is so far priced compared to the "regular" paper... would a printer do a regular job using ISO standards??? I don't think so... and if you try to include ---> ink L*a*b* ... then how much would a Summit page be worth??? Let's get real.

You're right about your observations. Can't blame the printers too kasi standardization comes with a price tag.

Standardization naman has two degrees: International and Internal. So kung ayaw nilang International then they can implement an in-house standard na lang basta ba documented lahat para consistent.

Yun nga lang kung in-house standards natin....meron din naman mga concerns like: How can we match an ISO 12647-7 proof from our clients? How will we match the softproof when we compare our press sheets with our LCD monitors especially if the client used the ISOcoatedv2.icc profile? How can we assure the customer who asked for a repeat job 5 or 6 months later?

Dapat siguro before accepting a certain job order clear sa customer and sa printer kung ano ang Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) na mapapagkasunduan para iwas pusoy.

My humble thoughts.

WORKFLOW wrote:

larrysison wrote:

To name a few....Triune Graphix, Summit, Velprint, Fortune and Printwell.

Hmmm.... interestingly Summit is implementing ISO standard - Velprint and Fortune are two of their printers (complying to the ISO standard as you say) so what about the other two... Jardis and House Printers? How can the public know if they conform to ISO, is there any certification?

In front of thier door going to prepress, you can find a stainless metal with a 12647 embossed with black and yellow color. I saw it at printwell, transprint and velprint

Quote :

This is the missing ingredient ---> "paper L*a*b*" this part of the requirement is hard to come by in P. I. and the price is so far priced compared to the "regular" paper... would a printer do a regular job using ISO standards??? I don't think so... and if you try to include ---> ink L*a*b* ... then how much would a Summit page be worth??? Let's get real.

Do you know the Lab value of Summit paper? Also the Lab value of the primaries?

Hi WORKFLOW.

Alex has a point. Could you please give us a ballpark figure of the most common paper (PT1/2) and process inks in the P.I.?

I think our paper back home is not that off in terms of brightness and paper shade. I suspect these 2 to be out of specification:

1) Low L* value, which I suppose is a bit lower than L*95, and
2) High -b* value, which suggests excessive amounts of OBA

But what the heck, even SAPPI paper has this problem too and really....this is not a big issue. Furthermore, the color and transparency of our process inks in the P.I. seems to be okay naman.

For all we know our "regular" paper and inks may very well be within the tolerances of the standards. The only way to find out is to measure it.

Have a nice weekend.

Larry

larrysison wrote:

Hi WORKFLOW.

Alex has a point. Could you please give us a ballpark figure of the most common paper (PT1/2) and process inks in the P.I.?

I think our paper back home is not that off in terms of brightness and paper shade. I suspect these 2 to be out of specification:

1) Low L* value, which I suppose is a bit lower than L*95, and
2) High -b* value, which suggests excessive amounts of OBA

But what the heck, even SAPPI paper has this problem too and really....this is not a big issue. Furthermore, the color and transparency of our process inks in the P.I. seems to be okay naman.

For all we know our "regular" paper and inks may very well be within the tolerances of the standards. The only way to find out is to measure it.

Have a nice weekend.

Larry

The only way to find out is to ask the printers implementing it...
And as far as I know there is none in P.I. implementing ISO standard in a CONSISTENT manner (if we may go back to my initial inquiry)...
you may raise your rebuttal by citing a single project here that does..
as the saying goes... actions speak louder than words

HAPPY HALLOWEEN

WORKFLOW wrote:

The only way to find out is to ask the printers implementing it...
And as far as I know there is none in P.I. implementing ISO standard in a CONSISTENT manner. (if we may go back to my initial inquiry)...
you may raise your rebuttal by citing a single project here that does..
as the saying goes... actions speak louder than words. HAPPY HALLOWEEN

Hi WORKFLOW.

Sorry to hear that. Sayang naman if they're ISO certified tapos they have problems in consistency. But isn't this normal?

We're ISO 12647 certified in 2006, and ISO 9001 certified since 2007 and YET we get occasional non-conformity reports from our internal and external customers.

You cannot eliminate variations in any process. Nobody can. The goal is to minimize the variations.

Quote :

The only way to find out is to ask the printers implementing it...
And as far as I know there is none in P.I. implementing ISO standard in a CONSISTENT manner (if we may go back to my initial inquiry)...
you may raise your rebuttal by citing a single project here that does..
as the saying goes... actions speak louder than words

One of the principles of practicing ISO is to back-up every job with data/report.

Anyway, I do not understand what do you mean by CONSISTENT manner. Consistency is very important in any press job even for one does not practice ISO standards. Otherwise customers will not return.

I am still curious if there is any printer in the Philippines implementing ISO in one of their clients or projects. If there is, then I would say they are CONSISTENT with their ISO standardization. Kindly name one project...
Im all ears...

Maybe you can call those ISO certified companies yourself and then keep us updated? Sounds like a plan?

larrysison wrote:

Maybe you can call those ISO certified companies yourself and then keep us updated? Sounds like a plan?

Is that your best answer??

Quote :

Is that your best answer?? Very Happy

I hate to say this, you do not understand what ISO standardization is. No point of arguing.

Hi Workflow. Re the capability of those printers....I Dont think Im the right guy to answer this. I've been overseas since 2001 and am not connected with those companies. As the QA in my company here Im just sharing ideas we have proven effective. Maybe you can address your question to Intet or APC.

larrysison wrote:

Hi Workflow. Re the capability of those printers....I Dont think Im the right guy to answer this. I've been overseas since 2001 and am not connected with those companies. As the QA in my company here Im just sharing ideas we have proven effective. Maybe you can address your question to Intet or APC.

Mmmm... you mean Intet of Summit???? Well, they are implementing ISO standard, UP TO THE PROOFING STAGE ONLY. Not really on press... I find this very very odd.

Alex Dulay wrote:

Quote :

Is that your best answer?? Very Happy

I hate to say this, you do not understand what ISO standardization is. No point of arguing.

Well, you are not the proper judge for that. Maybe you are in the wrong courtroom...
I hope you are not a policeman, or you will be a merciless executioner... heheh

But seriously, I can pollute this thread with technical terms regarding ISO --- but it is simply not my style. It will just be a waste of space in this nice forum because you can find those information anyway in the internet.
We are in a point of arguing, not to show the visitors or members of this forum who knows better. My point of arguing is to help them to make a choice for their decision making. The information you feed regarding ISO standards are well appreciated even by yours truly.
There are at least 20 visitors per day in this forum and most of them are seeking a piece of knowledge to get their business going. But also, we can help them to make decisions (e.g. invest to ISO or FM screening). That is what I'm trying to pursue.... nothing personal.

Understanding and polluting this thread with technical terms regarding ISO are totally different.

Quote :

There are at least 20 visitors per day in this forum and most of them are seeking a piece of knowledge to get their business going. But also, we can help them to make decisions (e.g. invest to ISO or FM screening). That is what I'm trying to pursue....

As i said in the other thread, FM screening is just part of the process. Let's say around 4, 8, or 12 digital files (depending on how much you pay for this RIP's optional screening).

* ISO's are standards.

* FM screening are random dots that can be simulated using Adobe Photoshop's error diffusion (for those who wanted to do experiment, for two colors, you can use this error diffusion in Photoshop, that is if your RIP has no free FM screening sample, )

I have nothing against your advocacy. It's just your presentations are misleading some of the visitors.

I will said it again, consultants and ISO certifying organizations have nothing to do if a printing company just hang/engrave ISO in their gates.

WORKFLOW wrote:

There are at least 20 visitors per day in this forum and most of them are seeking a piece of knowledge to get their business going. But also, we can help them to make decisions (e.g. invest to ISO or FM screening). That is what I'm trying to pursue.... nothing personal.

I can't agree with you more.

Alex Dulay wrote:

...consultants and ISO certifying organizations have nothing to do if a printing company just hang/engrave ISO in their gates

Yes, this is management problem. Not the consultant's. The consultant helped them achieve the target. Management decides if they want to hit the target every single time.

Now ladies, if I may. Let's wrap it up. I think we've started off on the wrong foot. It's time to light up the peace pipe.

[quote="Alex Dulay"

* FM screening are random dots that can be simulated using Adobe Photoshop's error diffusion (for those who wanted to do experiment, for two colors, you can use this error diffusion in Photoshop, that is if your RIP has no free FM screening sample, )quote]

If you do this, you will have no process control.

Sorry sir Larry, that will be my last comment. (just can't help it). Thank you for understanding my point of view.

Quote :

If you do this, you will have no process control.

Are you serious? If you are, I can tell how to control the dot size in PS but make sure to free up some hard disk space.

Guys, better create another thread for this.

Alex Dulay wrote:

Quote :

If you do this, you will have no process control.

Are you serious? If you are, I can tell how to control the dot size in PS but make sure to free up some hard disk space.

The picture above is an FM screen. This is a first-order FM screen. You will notice that it is grainy, hence the dot area can be inconsistent with gaussian output devices and low resolution plates. Strict process stability in the pressroom is required to stabilize output.


The picture above is a 2nd-order FM screen (Kodak Staccato). Tones are rendered by varying the spacing and the shape of the dot structures. The worm-like pattern (encircled) eliminate concerns about grainy appearance and gives improvement on press performance.


The picture above is a screen shot of Mr. Alex Dulay's Photoshop simulation of FM screening using "error diffusion".
You can follow the link below if you want to watch the YOUTUBE presentation on how to do this:

http://www.digitalartform.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?blog_id=1&tag=error%20diffusion&limit=20

This Photoshop artform is similar to the 1st-order FM screen. You will have to spend a lot of effort to implement this in real-life printing because:
A 2400 dpi square inch of 8-bit CMYK image is already 22MB. An approximate of 8 Gb hard disk space will have to be reserved, for you to be able to do this on a regular size poster!
How will you be able to implement your tonal calibration curve? whence you created the dots in Photoshop?

To Alex, YES I AM SERIOUS. YOU WILL HAVE NO PROCESS CONTROL WITH THIS METHOD. I am surprised because you claim in adherence with ISO standard yet you overlook process control with your Photoshop artform.

Hi WORKFLOW. You may want tackle this subject a 'lil further on our next EB. Yes?

larrysison wrote:

Hi WORKFLOW. You may want tackle this subject a 'lil further on our next EB. Yes?

No problem sir Larry...

Quote :

How will you be able to implement your tonal calibration curve? whence you created the dots in Photoshop?

To Alex, YES I AM SERIOUS. YOU WILL HAVE NO PROCESS CONTROL WITH THIS METHOD. I am surprised because you claim in adherence with ISO standard yet you overlook process control with your Photoshop artform.

Very nice. Appreciated.

No I did not overlook, it is possible.



And FM screening are fixed dots.