Pantone matching for digital printing

[Rick]

Pantone!!! I hate it. It's so irrelevant, today. A company chooses a Pantone color for their logo and noone will ever see that color. Their Web site is RGB, and they cannot control brightness contrast. Ditto on TV. Magazines are CMYK, as are brochures, newspaper and every other device a company uses to reach buyers.

Meanwhile, someone at a cocktail party actually get a business card with the Pantone color on it. Yippee!!!

Companies should standardize on RGB and CMYK, which will actually reproduce in the real world ... plus they don't have to pay for effing color chips and matching guides for their "designers."

OK, off my soapbox.

:^)

Jim

This statement is a load of crap...

All the finish products of print (especially gang printing), monitors/web, digital print, PMS Paint match, letterpress and screen printing all have inconsistencies. Pantone is just as good as any "standard" to start with to keep a consistency of color throughout all processes. Any idiot (not calling anyone here one) can press "print" or pull a stock color from the shelf, it really is an art (and frustration) to match color.

BUT! we snotty, obsessive designers need to learn the limitation of the output device, inks, paints, monitors or person running the machine.

When dealing with a new vendor they print me the PMS Colors (whichever one I am designing to) and match from that chart. Or I look for a qualified vendor to paint match PMS or spend a little extra time to attempt some color matching. That way it reduces most color issues at output and puts the responsibility on me who spec'ed the color in the first place. But I also expect to get charged for the time it takes and I always bring it up before a job is contracted.

 

[gabagoo]

I deal with this issue daily and it can be frustrating until you get a handle on it. I have printed the pantone coated chart from flexi on vinyl and banner and have done it 360 x 540 720 x 720 and 1440 x 720. I always use that to match as close as possible inside and outside, and MOST customers are agreeable in using the colours we find for them. Sure theres the odd hard ass but as Bob said, I let someone else deal with them. I will suppose a 6 colour printer and an 8 colour printer can achieve higher limitations than 4 colour, but is it worth it in the end?

 

[Jim Doggett]

Rick,

RGB / CMYK = within the spectrum the of technology that will be used to reproduce it; and noone pays a license fee to trademark attorneys (read: Pantone upper management)

Pantone = trademark attorneys are happy and colors that are within the spectrum of mixed printers inks, which are used with less and less frequency, every day.

I don't argue that it's a standard that's used, still, and frequently. But better, free standards exist in RGB and CMYK. I'd lobby for folks to start using in greater frequency the standards that are consistent with the reproduction technology that will be used to match them, which also happen to be free of licensing fees.

If that's a load of crap in your view, so be it. You're a trademark attorney's wet dream.

 

[Rick]

Rick,

RGB / CMYK = within the spectrum the of technology that will be used to reproduce it; and noone pays a license fee to trademark attorneys (read: Pantone upper management)

Pantone = trademark attorneys are happy and colors that are within the spectrum of mixed printers inks, which are used with less and less frequency, every day.

I don't argue that it's a standard that's used, still, and frequently. But better, free standards exist in RGB and CMYK. I'd lobby for folks to start using in greater frequency the standards that are consistent with the reproduction technology that will be used to match them, which also happen to be free of licensing fees.

If that's a load of crap in your view, so be it. You're a trademark attorney's wet dream.

But if monitors all display differently and all printers print differently then what kind of standard is that? Really tying trademark attorneys to a color standard is reaching quite a bit (The color conspiracy?). A consistent standard is one that a designer in Wyoming has in his hand is the same exact one the printer in California has. Don't like Pantone, use another, but color matching to a cheap Walmart screen compared to a high end monitor is not going to set any benchmark for quality results. My wet dream is getting my stuff to look how I design it and handed to me by a woman dressed up in a Hooters outfit carrying a plate of hot wings and a pitcher of beer... Not that I want you thinking about my nocturnal sleeping habits...

 

[Jim Doggett]

i couldnt have said it better myself. imagine the smile on my face when i told the customer, none of it mattered since there will be a lam-shift once its laminated. i mean give me a break.

Thanks, PW.

Agreed. Folks need to quit sweating minute (an unavoidable) color-shifts and go back to building profits with gimmickry like, marketing, sales, channel-leverage, product design/development, manufacturing efficiency and other things that actaullly affect and matter to buyers.

True story: in the early days Microsoft gray was a trademarked color (some company in Japan made and licensed custom colors). Gray is a printer's nightmare to start with, and it was nothing but a nightmare for Microsoft in product packaging and collateral development. Vendors and Microsoft product managers spent more time trying to get close to the color than they did producing and selling the effing product. Huge costs and delays in service of something that was utterly meaningless to buyers of Microsoft products.

It was pure designer and corporate ego-stroking. And stoooooopid. But to their credit, Microsoft killed it off quickly.

Best,

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

But if monitors all display differently and all printers print differently then what kind of standard is that?

Matrix wisdom: there is no spoon (nor standard)

:^)

Jim

 

[Gino]

We tell customers that it is only a reference chart and can only be used to get as close as humanly possible.

Here's a trick. Take a PMS book and compare it to another one and guaranteed... the colors will not all match either. Take a customers' business card or some other article of advertisement and compare it to anyone's chart..... it will be close, but none of them are on the money.

All the mumbo jumbo of explaining crap these people don't understand just confuses them further and makes you look like a jerk trying to get out of matching their color. Tell them from the start it's a reference point and you'll appear more professional than explaining all of your knowledge that sounds hokey.​

 

[ProWraps™]

gino, thats exactly what i did. problem is these corporate pencil pushers that just dont get it, only know how to say IT HAS TO BE PERFECT. ugh... $70 in over night shipping later, we finally got close enough they approved it. gotta love it!

 

[Rick]

(reworded as Gino's wisdom has enlightened me on the use of properly inserted words)

But if monitors all display differently and all printers print differently then what kind of reference is that?

 

[Jim Doggett]

Really tying trademark attorneys to a color standard is reaching quite a bit (The color conspiracy?).

True statement. Pantone is in the trademark business, purely. Their execs are quite often trademark attorneys. The color spectrum is in the public domain. (Godgiven) But describing color as P185, PMS Red 185 or on a color chip that looks at all similar to a Pantone Color Chip infringes their trademark.

 

[Ponto]

"Take a PMS book and compare it to another one and guaranteed... the colors will not all match either.

...and furthermore, we are all expected to "...replace this guide annually." I'm interested if any shops follow this recommendation found on the back of the Pantone guides...


JP

 

[Rick]

True statement. Pantone is in the trademark business, purely. Their execs are quite often trademark attorneys. The color spectrum is in the public domain. (Godgiven) But describing color as P185, PMS Red 185 or on a color chip that looks at all similar to a Pantone Color Chip infringes their trademark.

So you think we should throw away all our color REFERENCES and destroy the big color machine that is Pantone with the obsessive designer minions?... JUST PRESS PRINT! (or spray, or press, or squeegie) viva la revolucion'

 

[Jim Doggett]

But if monitors all display differently and all printers print differently then what kind of reference is that?

Excellent. Once accepting there is no standard, you'll see it bends as easily as the Matrix spoon. Thus "reference" is far more apt, and accurate.

So once folks get into a mindset of "it varies by medium so we want to be close to something" why not choose a "something" that's based on the same models used by the reproducing mediums, which are widely supported, well and easily understood--and FREE???

Just a thought.

 

[Rooster]

True statement. Pantone is in the trademark business, purely. Their execs are quite often trademark attorneys. The color spectrum is in the public domain. (Godgiven) But describing color as P185, PMS Red 185 or on a color chip that looks at all similar to a Pantone Color Chip infringes their trademark.

They have trademarked their production methods, reference guides, and the artwork associated with it. No different than we like to protect our own design work. They have not as you imply trademarked the color spectrum. They have also developed their own base inks and mixing formulations that allow printers to mix up inks correctly to match the colors specified in their guides. Then they have gone to the trouble of cross referencing those to other reproduction standards SWOP, etc. Certainly an amount of work and effort that deserves to be legally protected.

Pantone provides a useful guide that allows people in different locations to discuss color with a reference that you can hold in your hand and see what you're actually discussing. Try and explain a shade of forest green over the phone. Try and describe a teal. How do you do it without a reference? Would you like to try an alternate reality where we print color chips ourselves (based on a verbal description) and have to deliver them to our customers so they can see what we are discussing? Imagine how frustrating and difficult that would be without the tools that Pantone, TOYO, FOCALTONE, etc provide.

Sure, nothing is perfect. If you understand how we see and perceive color (and most pigments fugitive nature) then you have an idea of how difficult it is to try and describe a particular hue, lightness level or amount of saturation to someone without a reference.

Matching color is not rocket science. It is however science. Inexpensive tools and simple to use software are available to make it easy to do even for a beginner. If you can't match "in gamut" pantones, or print a neutral grayscale. Or even be able to tell prior to going to print whether you will be able to match a particular color. Then you're just making excuses to cover your own deficiencies. You're also throwing money down the drain in every reprint and lost customer over a color argument.

Of course you can always assume that it doesn't really matter. That customers are just too picky and anal. But I'll bet that when you send your own jobs to an outside source you're pretty darn picky about how the color looks when it comes back to you. If you get a bad print job back on your business cards, etc. you'll either complain or look elsewhere next time. But when it comes to your own customers you adopt a different attitude for some reason.

Will color management allow you to reproduce the entire pantone book? Not a chance! It's not meant to do that. Pastels with a white ink content, florescents, metallics, double strikes and their ilk just can't be made up with a CMYK or even a CMYKOG base formulation. The purity of the pigments in inkjet printers do however allow you to go WAY BEYOND the SWOP standards of your average offset press. They also allow for significantly greater matching ability to the standard pantone coated guide and a complete match of the PMS/CMYK reference guide.

These tools are available. Not only to you but to your customers. Ignore them at your own peril. Your customer base isn't. Eventually they will send a job to another shop that doesn't complain about them using an RGB black + white image, or CMY gray and all your excuses will come back and haunt you.

PS: I went on a bit of a rant there Jim. That wasn't all directed specifically at you.

 

[Jim Doggett]

They have not as you imply trademarked the color spectrum.

If I implied that, I stand corrected ... or at least should clarify. The color spectrum is public domain, Godgiven. I think I did more than merely imply that. Yes?

Now then, I can sell you vinyl that's any color of red I wish. But if I tell you it's 185 Red, then Pantone has infringement of their trademark. It's actionable. Fact, not fiction.

Now for some fiction: art schools tell students to "pick a Pantone color" from the guides required for this class and sold at the "student" store. Bingo. You'll get matching color from Milwaukee, California and Kalamazoo. Pure fiction. And it perpetuates a myth that results in frustration for vendors the world over, including many sign companies.

I think that's nuts.

Jim

 

[Mikeifg]

Been there with a pantone green and brown for a customer. Their Photoshop wiz came to my shop and played with the colors the whole day after I had sent examples etc... and he could not match it right. Sometimes people are so anal and they think they know the industry - equipment etc.. better than us.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Pantone provides a useful guide that allows people in different locations to discuss color with a reference that you can hold in your hand and see what you're actually discussing. Try and explain a shade of forest green over the phone.

Wait a minute!!! Not even a valid argument for Pantone.

Forest Green, from the CorelDRAW palette: 40,0,20,60 or 73/95/95. Unambiguous and nobody needs to buy matching guides for both ends of the phone conversation.

How on earth does Forest Green become less ambiguous over the phone when speaking Pantone numbers? It's not on the Pantone list; and is as best as I can tell somewhere in the range of PMS 5480ish????

Pantone is soooooo obsolete.

Jim

 

[Rooster]

Wait a minute!!! Not even a valid argument for Pantone.

Forest Green, from the CorelDRAW palette: 40,0,20,60 or 73/95/95. Unambiguous and nobody needs to buy matching guides for both ends of the phone conversation.

How on earth does Forest Green become less ambiguous over the phone when speaking Pantone numbers? It's not on the Pantone list; and is as best as I can tell somewhere in the range of PMS 5480ish????

Pantone is soooooo obsolete.

Jim

What version of CMYK are you using? Inkjet pigments (which manufacturer) or Standard Web Offset Printing (SWOP), or Hexachrome (PANTONE 6 color process) pigments. Ever compared them all? Do you think they match? Will they create the same color when mixed at the same percentages? Not a hope in hell. In fact even using the same inks will produce different colors on different medias.

If I have a two color print job what do I do to match the forest green when I want to run just it and say a black for text on a print run of 500,000 door knockers. Where do I go to buy a can of COREL forest green? Should I be forced to run process color to simplify your life? What if the SWOP inks from the offset press produce a different color green than the inkjet inks do? Who as the customer do I point the finger at?

Since you want to go by just the color name. A customer recently wanted a forest green for some store signage to match the green on their website.

RBG value was 8/50/7 under the AdobeRGB 1998 input profile
RGB Value was 0/46/0 under the sRGBIEC61966-2.1 input profile
RGB value was 0/36/0 under the Generic RGB profile input profile

CMYK Values were 100/51/100/58 using the US Sheetfed Coated v2 Output profile converting from the AdobeRGB 1998 colorspace.
CMYK Values were 79/53/86/69 using the US Web Coated (SWOP) v2 output profile converting from the sRGBIEC61966-2.1 input profile.

Confused yet? Quite a variety of different methods to achieve the same color. And yes.... they are all the same exact color.

Me, I went to their website, did a screen capture, opened that in photoshop and grabbed the color with the eyedropper.

On my banner stock the CMYK values were 65/3/100/50 using my custom profiles.
On my gloss vinyl stock the CMYK values were 65/2/98/56 using my custom profiles.

The weird thing is. My colors matched their website exactly. Even across the different medias. She dropped her other supplier because I gave her what she wanted. There was zero fuss on my part to achieve a perfect match. I even soft proofed it to make sure I used the resolution and pass settings required to lay down enough ink to match the color she wanted. 8 pass wouldn't do it BTW. But I knew that before I ever hit print.

BTW: All she had told me was that she wanted a "forest green" like on her website. Think she would have been happy had I grabbed the forest green from Corel? Her mistake or mine?

Pantone is a useful reference guide. I use it, the web, RGB values, SWOP CMYK, TOYO, FOCALTONE, paint chips etc to match colors all the time. The only values that won't change is LAB.

That why my rip (and yours) converts what you send it to LAB values based on the input profile assigned to it (or the default profile set in the RIP if there's no assigned input profile). Then it converts to the output profile your rip is using (canned or custom) for that media. So if you send it SWOP CMYK values, it's not printing those numbers on your inkjet. It's printing what your inkjet needs to. To match those SWOP color LAB values.

So in the end I didn't use a Pantone reference in this case. I used RGB values from a calibrated monitor. Still there was a reference color. "Forest Green" simply would have been too ambiguous to work with. A pantone guide book is what others prefer to use. I don't care what they use as long as I have a reference to grab the LAB values from. Pantone to me is just as useful as RGB or CMYK. All it is is a reference color to match. No more difficult than any other. It's not like I can reproduce the entire AdobeRGB1998 gamut either.

For professional print buyers who make purchases that span across a variety or different production methods Pantone is a very handy tool. Who am I to tell them that they're using an obsolete method of specifying color? It's what they've chosen to use. It's up to me to adapt and provide the best match to it that I can. With the right knowledge and tools, it's no more difficult than using any other reference.

 

[P Wagner]

Rooster:

Bravo! Could not have said it better.

 

[Ponto]

GOTTA' COPY AND PASTE THAT STUFF... WELL DONE!

jp