Light Cyan and Light Magenta

[Correct Color]

Andy,

Thanks for the warning. But then trolls like him are all over the Internet.

Fact is though that he left me an easy layup and I had to take it.

Of course he doesn't care and I'm sure he'll have some country/cutesy reply.

But I'm not talking to him anyway.

I'm just using him to get the point across.



Mike

 

[Andy D]

Andy,

Thanks for the warning. But then trolls like him are all over the Internet.

Fact is though that he left me an easy layup and I had to take it.

Of course he doesn't care and I'm sure he'll have some country/cutesy reply.

But I'm not talking to him anyway.

I'm just using him to get the point across.



Mike

I wouldn't say a troll, just extremely sure of his knowledge of all the facts regardless of his limited experience.
A real smart guy to be sure, but totally blind to knowing what he doesn't know.
Probably a nice guy in real life though.

 

[bob]

...merciful deletia...

Statement in dispute: ...what comes out of the printer is the truth...

So, I’m reading that and my first impression is that it really doesn’t make any sense...

...more merciful deletia...

Which word didn't you understand? The statement is inarguable. What comes out of the printer is not what you hope will come out of the printer, not what you wish would come out of the printer, not what you beseech whatever gods to which you pray to make come out of the printer. What comes out of the printer is the truth. Given the inputs that you gave it, what rolls out the front is what you get. It's mind boggling that a specimen even as dull as you give every indication of being cannot comprehend this simple principle.

The statement is merely a corollary to the first axiom of software, that being "The code is the truth." Meaning that the code is not going do what you hope it will do, what you wish it would do, what you get down on your knees and pray to your gods it will do. It will do exactly what's written, no more no less.

A note to pretentious microcephalics such as you and your posse [of one apparently]. I was dealing with color processing and digital imaging when you, and your parents as well, were making in their pants. Try to follow along here, it's important. Like many if not most things in life, this topic is like an onion, the more you peel it the simpler it gets. Perhaps it seems complicated to your child-like mind because you do not understand it, not because you do.

 

[Andy D]

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah, not what you beseech whatever gods to which you pray to make come out of the printer. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah It's mind boggling that a specimen even as dull as you give every indication of being cannot comprehend this simple principle.

The statement is merely a corollary to the first axiom of software, that being "The code is the truth."Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah, what you get down on your knees and pray to your gods it will do. It will do exactly what's written, no more no less.

A note to pretentious microcephalics such as you and your posse [of one apparently]. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah when you, and your parents as well, were making in their pants. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah. Perhaps it seems complicated to your child-like mind because you do not understand it, not because you do.

Haha, see what I mean? Thanks Bob, that's awesome! You never disappoint!

On a side note Bob, have you ever read Confederacy of Dunces? If not, you should, you're Ignatius J. Reilly come to life!
Someone needs to compile your posts.

 

[bob]

Haha, see what I mean? Thanks Bob, that's awesome! You never disappoint!

On a side note Bob, have you ever read Confederacy of Dunces? If not, you should, you're Ignatius J. Reilly come to life!
Someone needs to compile your posts.

You artfully managed to 'blah-blah' over the entire point. Is this what passes for witty repartee there in your tribe when you're not grooming each other's pelts and pointing at the sun?

 

[Andy D]

You artfully managed to 'blah-blah' over the entire point. Is this what passes for witty repartee there in your tribe when you're not grooming each other's pelts and pointing at the sun?

I actually laughed out loud, good one.
To answer your question though, the blah blah blah were an attempt to be witty, but also to bring focus to the gem encrusted turds you like to drop...

 

[DerbyCitySignGuy]

I actually laughed out loud, good one.
To answer your question though, the blah blah blah were an attempt to be witty, but also to bring focus to the gem encrusted turds you like to drop...

I like to read all your posts in Chris Pratt's voice and it makes them even better.

 

[Correct Color]

Andy,

I dunno. I’ve seen a lot of trolls in my day, and right off, I’d say this guy looks like one to me.

Bob,

Wow…

Seven insults in three paragraphs. If I was one to be impressed by such things, I suppose I’d be impressed. However, the simple fact is that one of the central tenets by which I live my life is that in any argument in any forum, if you feel you have to resort to insults in order to get your point across, then you are losing the argument.

Facts speak for themselves.

Plus there’s the fact that you don’t even know me. And for any insult to have any sting what-so-ever, it is helpful if it has some grounding, some basis, in reality.

So, for instance, lets take, “A note to pretentious microcephalics such as you and your posse [of one apparently]. I was dealing with color processing and digital imaging when you, and your parents as well, were making in their pants.”

Well…

I’ll just say that I wish that were truly so. Sadly, the fact is that I’ve been involved in the business of putting ink onto media since then 1970’s. And it so happens that in 1980 — as I recall — I stood in a room with some clients at Blanks Engraving in Dallas and watched the first computer laser scan ever produced in Texas. Since that was basically at the dawn of digital imaging, there isn’t any way you can have been in it longer than me.

I’m afraid all the rest of your insults fall just as far from their intended targets, so I’m afraid their cumulative effect is not to make you look like a cutting an insightful wit, but just to make you seem buffoonish.

Okay, so…

Statement in dispute: ...what comes out of the printer is the truth...

Actually, no. This is the statement in dispute:

A decent CMYK machine and comprehension of the principle that what comes out of the printer is the truth will serve 99.9% of those doing this sort of printing.

Nice try though.

Which word didn't you understand? The statement is inarguable. What comes out of the printer is not what you hope will come out of the printer, not what you wish would come out of the printer, not what you beseech whatever gods to which you pray to make come out of the printer. What comes out of the printer is the truth. Given the inputs that you gave it, what rolls out the front is what you get. It's mind boggling that a specimen even as dull as you give every indication of being cannot comprehend this simple principle.

The statement is merely a corollary to the first axiom of software, that being "The code is the truth." Meaning that the code is not going do what you hope it will do, what you wish it would do, what you get down on your knees and pray to your gods it will do. It will do exactly what's written, no more no less.[/quote

Now, as you describe it here, then the simple saying that ‘what comes out of the printer is the truth’ is at least accurate as far as it goes. But so what?

It’s as self-evident as it is pointless.

…comprehension of the principle that what comes out of the printer is the truth…

In that context, just what is there to “comprehend.” ‘The printer just printed this, therefore it’s the truth!’

So? You brought that down from the mountaintop?

Let me explain where you’ve gone wrong:

By your analogy, in this industry, profiles are "The Code".


Get that?


See, I would define “truth” as an immutable, unchangeable constant. So “what comes out of the printer is the truth” would mean that what comes out of the printer is an immutable, unchangeable constant.

But it’s not. It is infinitely changeable. Changing it is what I do for a living.

So, by your analogy, what I do is write code. And then as well by your analogy, what I write, profiles — printing code — that is the truth. What the printer prints is changeable with the profiles.

Simple. See?

So I don’t have to hope or wish or beseech any gods. And the truth that comes out of that printer is because of the profiles I write. And if I don’t like that ‘truth’ I’ll just alter the profiles until I do.

And these profiles are absolutely what tells that printer how to print. They control every single function. They tell the printer how to create the printing dots. They control ink splits, multi-dot generation, linearization, multi-channel ink limits, characterization and black generation.

And controlling each of these functions can have a great impact on the final result a printer prints, whether you’d like to believe that or not.

Just for instance: Maybe a machine is producing full gamut for a particular media, but the prints are grainy in the highlights to three-quarter tones; adjusting the ink splits can fix that.

Maybe a machine is reaching its full gamut capability, but the ink is coalescing and solids look like crap. Adjusting when the larger dots come in can fix that.

The correlation between single-channel ink limits and multi-channel ink limits has a direct impact on any printer’s ability both to print vibrant two-color primaries, and rich 3 and four color blends as well. And there is no right or wrong one-size-fits-all answer.

Now, maybe what you think is that all of this his in reality done by some high-tech wizardry in some lab-o-ra-tory deep in the bowels of HP or Roland or EFI or wherever, and that it’s a hands-off all techno process. Or maybe you think that how a printer prints is written into it before it ships and it is unchangeable.

If you do, you’re wrong.

Every time you print with your printer, you’re using a profile that was written by someone. An individual. And every printing parameter had to be set by some individual as well. And all of those parameters are infinitely variable, and every one of them determines your final print.

I look at...

A decent CMYK machine and comprehension of the principle that what comes out of the printer is the truth will serve 99.9% of those doing this sort of printing.

…and what I see is a statement that says whatever the printer prints cannot be improved. If that’s not what it says, remembering that my business is writing the code that tells the printer how to print, tell me where I’m mistaken.

But if that statement does mean what it says, then that attitude would lead a devout believer no choice but to either sell that “truth” to every client that walks in the door, with no hope of making it any better, or to attempt to alter the input — printing jobs — to get them to match the “truth” of the printer.

No doubt there are people who make money doing either or both of these things, but they’re making their lives much, much more difficult than they need be, and every single client they have is low-hanging fruit for a competitor who knows better.

And I’ll just add in closing that while you also think “a decent CMYK machine” is fine, I cannot tell you the number of times I’ve had to explain to people why they can’t hit Pantone 021, or Home Depot Orange, or AT&T Orange, or KTM Orange, with a CMYK machine.

Or why with an eco-solvent single-black machine they get greys that are so susceptible to hue shift unless I bring the black in so early as to be too grainy.

I also can’t tell you how much work-a-day sign shops who have Seiko H2’s love them because they have triple black. Not because they really care about triple black, but because of the greys they can achieve.

Bottom line is that all these things matter to a lot of people. If they don’t matter to you, that’s fine.

But I’d say that’s your — and your client’s — loss.

 

[Andy D]

Damn Bob, I believe Correct Color put a "FULL GAMUT" whoop *** down on you!

C'mon Bob, it's time to bring the big thesaurus out for this one!

Also, Fred Please don't lock this thread, I know it's sad, but this is all I have to look forward too.

 

[Andy D]

Before the bell rings for the start of the next round, I did want to point out that Bob has his moments
of insightfulness, he said I was a "microcephalics", which I wasn't familiar with & had to Google.

I thought I was looking at one of my Face book images when I saw this one:

 

[bob]

I’ll just say that I wish that were truly so. Sadly, the fact is that I’ve been involved in the business of putting ink onto media since then 1970’s. And it so happens that in 1980 — as I recall — I stood in a room with some clients at Blanks Engraving in Dallas and watched the first computer laser scan ever produced in Texas. Since that was basically at the dawn of digital imaging, there isn’t any way you can have been in it longer than me.

Really? That was around the same time that I was an MTS at HP labs. Dealing with much the same sort of stuff, just a taste more advanced and a lot more intense.

That notwithstanding, there is a point to all of this. It has to do with a principle laid down by William of Ockham somewhere in the 13th or 14th century. You may know it as Occam's razor, perhaps the most misquoted and misunderstood principle in all of science and philosophy. That being "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily.". Meaning, among other things, don't make your work, or your life, any more complicated than it has to be.

Your way probably works just fine, as does mine. The difference being that yours is spectacularly complex where mine is a model of simplicity. Both manage to get the job done but mine leaves time for smelling roses and riding horses. Yours does not. It's much like a geo-centric versus a helio-centric explanation of the movement of the solar system and objects beyond. Either one explains it. Hell, you could declare the tip of your nose to be the center of the universe and proceed to describe all motion about that point. It's simply that with a helio-centric model the arithmetic is so much simpler. Not having to deal with retrograde motion and all of that.

The difference being that I understand your way but you really don't seem to understand mine. You accept your various inputs as constants and expect the printer to bend to your will. Whereas I accept what can come out of the printer and adjust my input accordingly. I unscrew the light bulb by turning the bulb, you unscrew the light buld by turning the room. Either way will work but mine's simpler and, by definition [old Bill's], better.

 

[player]

So what Bob seems to be saying is your printer prints what it prints,

Color correct is say he can improve on that and make it noticeably better...

 

[Gene@mpls]

And that it makes more difference to some people than others.

 

[Brink]

The original question was:

What actually causes these two colors to fire during print? Is there a specific cmyk that I can use to get these two heads to fire by there selves? Might be stupid question...just trying to understand

And your answer according to Bob's philosophy is: Print spot colors until you figure it out.

And according to Color Correct: Create a profile that allows you to specify your color.

The "Truth" is somewhere in between. If you you have no profile, you will need to print spot colors till you figure out which RGB or CMYK colors cause the respective colors to fire solid spots as desired. If you have a profile set for a particular media, you will have to do the same thing. It would just be a different combination for each. No one will be able to answer your question with any certainty. What makes it happen for them will not apply to you unless you are using the same rip, profile, printer and inkset that they are using.

 

[Brink]

I would add that this has been quite the entertaining thread though.

 

[dypinc]

If you you have no profile, you will need to print spot colors till you figure out which RGB or CMYK colors cause the respective colors to fire solid spots as desired.

If you have a profile set for a particular media, you will have to do the same thing.

No you don't. Each Media profiled correctly and the proper LAB values in the RIPs Pantone Libraries and you won't have to waste your time with such nonsense.

For those of you that don't get it, give it up. All you do is make yourself look ridiculous with your "try to make yourself feel good arguments because can't comprehend or refuse to comprehend how simple color management really is". Figure out by screwing around with RGB or CMYK colors to try to cause the respective colors to fire color as desired, is the most ridiculous waste of time and materials I can think of, unless that is something you really enjoy. Just because that might be something you enjoy does mean others of us do or have the time to do. Then to have to do that all over again after a hardware change or every time for the next Media etc. is laughable.

 

[Brink]

For those of you that don't get it, give it up. All you do is make yourself look ridiculous with your "try to make yourself feel good arguments because can't comprehend or refuse to comprehend how simple color management really is".

That was still a non answer to his question. Why don't you splain it for us ridiculous looking simple folk. What are our options? Spend big bucks for color profiling solutions or "waste" 5 bucks printing spots till we find the color we need?

 

[dypinc]

That was still a non answer to his question. Why don't you splain it for us ridiculous looking simple folk. What are our options? Spend big bucks for color profiling solutions or "waste" 5 bucks printing spots till we find the color we need?

What question?

If you want to go cheap, why not paint, or crayons? RIPs and Printers cost big bucks too, so why not a complete tool set?

Why just spots? How are you going to get process RGB or CMYK colors correct?

 

[Brink]

This question.

What actually causes these two colors to fire during print? Is there a specific cmyk that I can use to get these two heads to fire by there selves? Might be stupid question...just trying to understand

Lots of flames. Lots of passion for people in both camps. Lots of insults being hurled. No real answers. Only philosophy.

 

[DerbyCitySignGuy]

This question.



Lots of flames. Lots of passion for people in both camps. Lots of insults being hurled. No real answers. Only philosophy.

Well, Mike did kind of answer that question: ink breaks. If you know where your printer switches from using magenta to light magenta or cyan to light cyan, you should be able to create a file that would print pure light magenta or pure light cyan.