Question in-RIP spot color matching improvement vs GM Colorpicker/Colorlogic Colorant

[bteifeld]

Many RIPs offer the possibility of trying to get a closer match to a desired spot color(i.e. Pantone) by using an iterative process and the operator's visual perception and/or spectro-based delta-e measurement. GretagMacBeth's Colorpicker and Colorlogic's Colorant can take one or more spot colors and optimize the ink build post-profile to get a better color match automatically.

I wondered about anyone's personal experience here- do the automated tools(Colorpicker/Colorant) do a better job, or does the iterative perceptual/measurement method work better?

 

[Pauly]

What are you trying to achieve?

colorant does not iterate a profile.
It corrects measurement data and modifies measurement data if you’re changing your ink colours in your press. For example if you change out cyan for reflex blue. You just tell it to replace cyan with the LAB value of reflex blue and it’ll do it’s calculations and change the values in your measurement data to simulate reflex blue in your press. you would have to create a profile from
The data using colorlogic copra or another profiling software.

 

[bteifeld]

I am trying to achieve the best possible reproduction of a spot color given an
inkset, media, and icc profile.

With respect to Colorant, my experience of the color editor feature is that it allows
for the refinement of the ink build for a given spot color to achieve a better color match.
My goal is to take advantage of this to improve spot color reproduction. You load a set of
spot color definitions of interest, go into the color editor, choose the icc profile for the media
you are working with, and then have the color editor process those spot colors with respect
to that color profile. You can then save the potentially improved ink builds in a named color
profile or CGATS file.

My reference to iteration referred to something I have seen in Onyx and EFI,
if I recall correctly, where the RIP allows you to make your own manual
adjustments to the ink build or the L*a*b* number associated with the
spot color, and then use visual perception or spectro measurement to
confirm whether it is better or not.

 

[Pauly]

I am trying to achieve the best possible reproduction of a spot color given an
inkset, media, and icc profile.

With respect to Colorant, my experience of the color editor feature is that it allows
for the refinement of the ink build for a given spot color to achieve a better color match.
My goal is to take advantage of this to improve spot color reproduction. You load a set of
spot color definitions of interest, go into the color editor, choose the icc profile for the media
you are working with, and then have the color editor process those spot colors with respect
to that color profile. You can then save the potentially improved ink builds in a named color
profile or CGATS file.

My reference to iteration referred to something I have seen in Onyx and EFI,
if I recall correctly, where the RIP allows you to make your own manual
adjustments to the ink build or the L*a*b* number associated with the
spot color, and then use visual perception or spectro measurement to
confirm whether it is better or not.

Okay i see what you're trying to do.
Do you have colorant? if so, try and see if it works for you?
i haven't really played with that feature so i can't really give info on it.
But the way i do this is i build the best profile i can.

i'll use onyx swatchbooks to hit spot colours more closely as it's so much easier then trying to add them into your profile.
and if your file has a spot colour channel, onyx will pick it up and make changes if spot colour replacement table is "on"
it's a lot easier that way, and you can manage the spot colours separate from your profile.

 

[bteifeld]

I actually have done a trial with colorant, and it definitely does what I need
in re spot color ink build improvement.

 

[Pauly]

I actually have done a trial with colorant, and it definitely does what I need
in re spot color ink build improvement.

Are you sure it's not overkill for what you're doing?
what RIP are you using?

 

[bteifeld]

Are you sure it's not overkill for what you're doing?
what RIP are you using?

I use the Ergosoft RIP. The reason I feel it is appropriate is because there have been enough
examples of cases where I have seen both Colorpicker/Colorant take a 6-10 delta e 2000
difference down to 3 or less.

 

[Pauly]

I use the Ergosoft RIP. The reason I feel it is appropriate is because there have been enough
examples of cases where I have seen both Colorpicker/Colorant take a 6-10 delta e 2000
difference down to 3 or less.

What software are you using to create icc profiles?

 

[bteifeld]

I use the Ergosoft RIP's internal provided profiling software- ColorGPS.

 

[Pauly]

okay i'm not to familiar with that RIP and the profile quality.

There's a lot of different way as you've pointed out.
I personally use onyx's swatchbooks. print off a patch set, measure and find the closest match and save it. and it's always there.

I have colorant, but never put all the features to use.
i also have i1 profiler, i tried the iteration process but didn't see much of a difference.
and in onyx, it now has an iteration process and that too, i didn't find much of a difference.

It comes down to how you make the profile too though.

I can't give you a proper answer to which way is better. You'd need to test them out yourself (if you have access to the software) and i dont think many or anyone can give you the answer.

Although i have wanted to print a bunch of pantone colours and see how close they are to my current profiles. And to play with colorant more and have a look at all the features, but we've been far to busy to do that. That's why the quickest method works well for us (onyx swatchbooks)

 

[bteifeld]

I shuold clarify something- sorry for being confusing- when I referred to an iterative method,
I was not speaking of the process in i1profiler. I was really discussing exactly what you mentioned
regarding how you use Onyx Swatchbooks. Onyx and EFI use the same process, and I may have
been thinking of EFI being iterative because it may change the swatches you measure to get an
even better possible match.

If you ever happen to have a moment to explore the color editor in colorant, I think you might be
pleasantly surprised.

 

[Pauly]

I shuold clarify something- sorry for being confusing- when I referred to an iterative method,
I was not speaking of the process in i1profiler. I was really discussing exactly what you mentioned
regarding how you use Onyx Swatchbooks. Onyx and EFI use the same process, and I may have
been thinking of EFI being iterative because it may change the swatches you measure to get an
even better possible match.

If you ever happen to have a moment to explore the color editor in colorant, I think you might be
pleasantly surprised.

Ahh, so i wouldn't call onyx swatchbooks an "iterating" method. as it doesn't update the profile.
BUT - Onyx since x18 has an iterating step after creating an ICC profile to gain further accuracy.

I'll need to set some time to have a look at colorant colour editor, i've had a look at most of the other features.