Pantone matching for digital printing

[bbeens]

Rooster-

I have been following this thread. I will agree with Jim's dislike of Pantone but I understand the issue is not with the Pantone people it is with people in the digital printing world being overly obsessed with PMS numbers and not understanding what they should be used for or how to use them. In the end PMS should be a dying standard based on no inkjet printer is ever loaded with Pantone ink. LAB is the real answer to the 'color standard' question as Bob mentioned above, I might disagree with some of Bob's caveats - but that is another topic.

With your understanding of how PMS can be used in a digital workflow I would expect you would not have the issues the OP was complaining about. I am quite certain you have a good understanding of color management with regards to your workflow.

I will disagree with the comments that CMYK or RGB is a valid alternative unless a specific flavor of CMYK or RGB is also defined. Just stating CMYK means nothing to a printer without knowing the profile the file was created with. Same with RGB.

Learn LAB and love it. The complaints of different monitors, printers, etc producing different colors are a moot point with LAB (given the monitors are profiled and well maintained and the color asked for is within gamut on each of the different printers and rendering intents are specified correctly).

Bryan

 

[Gino]

Let's throw out all colors and tell people they have to match according to my 'Crayola' box of crayons. If ya don't like it... lump it.

​

 

[Jim Doggett]

I have been following this thread. I will agree with Jim's dislike of Pantone but I understand the issue is not with the Pantone people it is with people in the digital printing world being overly obsessed with PMS numbers and not understanding what they should be used for or how to use them. In the end PMS should be a dying standard based on no inkjet printer is ever loaded with Pantone ink. LAB is the real answer to the 'color standard' question as Bob mentioned above, I might disagree with some of Bob's caveats - but that is another topic.

Absolutely!!! And no buts about it. Pantone is what it is. My gripe is with folks who think it the Holy Grail and make unreasonable work for and demands of sign-makers, in the service of an objective that is highly over-rated from a brand-ID standpoint.

 

[P Wagner]

I might suggest that neither of these offer the 'best' solution. If a true, independent standard is the goal, without intrusive and onerous licensing restrictions, such an animal does exist - L*A*B* color. It is an encompassing color gamut that defines color in an absolute manner, with no room for subjectivity or variability.

At the same time, LAB is not a panacea. It 'suffers' from some of the same issues that beset Pantone, namely that it's gamut is much larger than even Pantone's and certainly larger than process CMYK. It does however remove the subjectivity of process color models and do so without any trademark/ IP/ licensing isues, a la Pantone.

Castek Resources

Bryan:
I'm curious what you would disagree with the above. I'm a big proponent of LAB, but everything that I stated is accurate to my understanding (note the quotes, meaning that LAB does not really suffer from being too large, in fact that is one of it's greatest assets).

 

[bbeens]

The only part I would disagree with would be that I didn't notice the quote marks. Please disregard my comment with regards to your caveats. Next time I will try to fully understand what I am responding to.

Cheers,

Bryan

 

[kev3232]

Rooster-

" the issue is not with the Pantone people it is with people in the digital printing world being overly obsessed with PMS numbers"

I don't think it's "people in the digital printing world" that create so many problems with PMS colors. It's every "designer" jackass that thinks he's setting the world on fire because he has a "vision" of how his clients "look" should be. The problem is they don't have a freakin' clue how the "real" printing world works because he sits behind his 30" Apple monitor all day playing with Illustrator thinking anything is possible.

 

[Rick]

Everything is possible....

 

[ProWraps™]

I don't think it's "people in the digital printing world" that create so many problems with PMS colors. It's every "designer" jackass that thinks he's setting the world on fire because he has a "vision" of how his clients "look" should be. The problem is they don't have a freakin' clue how the "real" printing world works because he sits behind his 30" Apple monitor all day playing with Illustrator thinking anything is possible.

thank you kev! you got it right on the head. and if some of you look at the color i was trying to match it is pretty much a pastel. one that would need some sort of white to reach. i had no idea that this thread would get this large. but it is very informative to say the least.

 

[kev3232]

thanks, i just call it like i see it!

kev

 

[Checkers]

Actually, anything is possible.

Show me the money and I can make it happen - if the client is willing to pay for it

Checkers

 

[kev3232]

oh yeah checkers? then print me a swatch that matches gerber bright orange!

i got a customer that can't get through his head that it's almost impossible to match ink to vinyl, especially oranges!! he's insists that my 30 thousand dollar machine is a piece of junk because i can't match pigmented vinyl!
gotta love customers!!
kev

 

[Rooster]

Pantone provides a number of tools designed specifically to provide colors that can be matched using CMYK inks. The they also provide their formula (spot ink) guide. Many colors within than can also be reproduced, many colors cannot. They actually show you within the guide which ones can and cannot be using SWOP CMYK inks.

All it takes is a calm and rational explanation to the customer as to why those colors are not an appropriate choice for CMYK reproduction. As I've stated previously, these people come to us because we are professional printers. They expect us to be able to do it, or at the very least be able to explain to their satisfaction why it's not possible. If you can show them the errors of their ways and explain to them the limitations of the process you will save them time, money and hassle down the road.

There's a tremendous amount of frustration that goes with color matching. I know this personally because for many years my business focused on fine art giclee printing. You think matching pantone is tough, try matching artists pigments with no formula guide. Color management solved 98% of these problems for me. It didn't allow me to match every color under the sun, but it did allow me to see if there was going to be a problem before I even started. It also provided the closest match to out of gamut colors without any fuss and muss.

The sign industry is focused on CMYK and the fastest print speed possible. Other parts of the wide format market use printers with up to 16 colors and greatly increased gamut sizes. The Epson GS6000 is the first solvent printer to come standard with a special OG inkset (basically Pantone Hexachrome process inks). Since orange and green have traditionally been the weakest portions of the CMYK spectrum this inkset greatly increases the number of colors than can be reproduced. Pantone claims 90% of the formula guide, which they say is more than twice the amount that traditional SWOP CMYK can achieve.

Not all of that comes strictly from the OG inks. The Hexachrome CMYK inks are much brighter and more vivid. More like the inks we have on our inkjet printers. Even without the OG addition these inks would greatly expand the number of colors available on press. Much the way our inkjets are able to produce brighter more vivid prints than a traditional offset press.

For example comparing the gamut size of USWebCoatedSWOP, the default profile in the north american pre-press settings with the adobe creative suite to what I'm able to attain using a production speed on my inkjet (720x720 - 16pass on a cheap lustre finish photo stock). Shows that the WebCoated profile can only handle 50.3% of the colors that my printer is capable of. A much better comparison is to use the USSheetfedCoated profile which represents the sheetfed presses that we see more commonly. In that case we see that the USSheetfedCoated profile can handle 65.9% of the colors my inkjet is capable of. The inkjet is still able to produce almost 50% more colors than a sheetfed press using standard (non hexachrome process inks). The brighter hexachrome CMYK inks would definitely close this gap.

Now the standard color management with your RIP will automatically "boost" the colors you print. Mapping the smaller gamut to larger inkjet gamut. Especially if you're using a perceptual rendering intent. Here's the thing though. If you take the artists artwork and convert it to CMYK. You're cramming it all into those tiny little press gamuts. It remaps the colors to something that can be produced with it's smaller range of available colors. You see how this changes the colors. Especially if you're using the WebCoated default profile. Then your rip is using a series of mathematical algorithms to map the colors in that smaller gamut to the larger available gamut in either your canned or custom profile. So if you started with an in-gamut pantone spot, converted to CMYK and then sent it to your rip. You're going to have a hell of a time matching colors. First you took a color within your available gamut, changed it to fit within a much smaller gamut, and then "hope" that the gamut mapping of the perceptual intent will put it back to where it was to begin with. Now if you understand anything about how the perceptual intent works you realize that it's going to make hue adjustments anyhow to maximize the brightness and dynamic range of your photos. This creates a color shift on anything near the edge of the available gamut.

Using an RGB input work flow, and keeping the colors in spot form (maintaining their LAB values). Then making a single conversion in the RIP to a much more accurate custom profile allows you to print every color that's within the printers available gamut. Using the Relative Colorimetric intent will also maintain the hues better than perceptual will. Although this sacrifices some "punch" for greater accuracy. This method is far better at matching colors that are within the available gamut of your machine. Often many of the colors you're trying to match are possible. It's your workflow that's messing with them and moving them around. Far more than you realize are there for the taking. You're just hiding them on yourself.

The RGB workflow is a double edged sword however. Designers working in RGB will see all the wonderful colors available within the RGB gamut. Of which the production speed custom profile I noted above can only capture 45% of (adobeRGB1998). However, the end product produced by my workflow still provides up to twice the available colors as can be reproduced using a web offset press. It also produces a much more accurate representation of more pantone (or other reference guide) colors. If the designer thinks you're going to match every color on their screen then you will have a problem. In my experience they do not ever think this. If they have ever sent a job out before they've experienced the dramatic shift in color already. It might be difficult to explain to somebody's secretary why the RGB green prints so differently than what she sees on her screen, but most "designers" have either been schooled in the difference or experienced it already.

Having a ready explanation in layman's terms of the differences between additive and subtractive color helps to either explain the differences. Or it leaves them so baffled and impressed that they trust your expertise. I don't deal with too many of these issues as the majority of my clients understand much of this. Many of them have sought me out due to the expertise I offer in this area. Even the ones that don't get it, have it explained to them when they see a soft proof on screen. They see the differences in color and ask about it. I rarely provide hard copy proofs anymore. Another additional benefit of color management.

So there it is in all it's glory. The secret to my success. Although it's hardly a secret. This is just a summary of the proper workflow in a well maintained color managed shop. It's not as if it's my invention. I do attest that it works. It works very very well. If your workflow is set-up using CMYK. If you're using canned profiles. If you're using one profile for a variety of different medias and resolutions. If you cannot produce an accurate and neutral grayscale. You're doing it wrong. It might work for you. It might make you a lot of money. But when you want to moan and complain about how unrealistic designers are about matching colors. Then understand that there's plenty of shops like mine out there. The more you bullshit them with excuses and tell them it's simply not possible the more loyal they become when then finally walk into my shop or someone's like mine and see the difference. But don't let me tell you what to think, or what to tell your customers. You guys send a lot of business my way. Thank you for that!

BTW if you think you have it bad now, wait until you're having to compete with solvent machines that use not only a special orange and green, but blues, violets and reds. Pantone is hardly dead or antiquated. It's CMYK that is being shown the door. Digital presses and inkjet printers that allow for 6, 8, 10 or 12+ color set-ups that will knock your socks off in the years to come. We'll be buying a lot of ink in the future, but it will be filled with bright glorious color. Buy the tools and learn the methods you'll need to hit them all. You won't regret it.

 

[kev3232]

whoa dude. just write a response, not a book. LOL


kev

 

[Ponto]

... northerners rock!

JP

 

[cdiesel]

Anything is possible if the money's there. You could always screen print with spot colors.
Profiling correclty takes care of a LOT of the matching issues out there. Since the introduction of the Roland Color matching system, I haven't had a problem at all hitting spot colors. Even if it's not in the system already, a few swatches later and I've got it down.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Whew! Thanks for the lengthy lesson, Rooster.

Side note: didja get a chance to come up with the Pantone identifiers for the category-leading brands' home pages: Apple, Microsoft, AT&T?

I've no doubt that Pantone is scrambling for relevency in a digital world, since folks aren't mixing printer's inks too much these days. Heck; I think they even dabbled in a matching system for Web graphics ... pure comedy. Hexachrome is a player, but then, it's to a niche market ... not like the good old days when every printer in town was mixing inks.

Maybe a quick Web poll here might get an idea of how small the niche is (yes; I know it's not scientifically valid due to the selection bias):

CMYK printer?

CLcMLmYK printer?

CMYKOrGr printer?

Printer with more effing color channels still?

Then of course, are the designers who seem to know so much about brand-ID choosing Pantone CMYK or Hex values ... or is it from the good old, and antiquated, Pantone Swatch Book folks have been using since the last century?

And if the big guys apparently don't give a hoot, is Pantone on the way up or down?

I think down. I think small companies with interns and new grads from local art schools will demand this stuff. But it's a small market, and getting smaller.

Jim

 

[Rooster]

Jim, I'm not going to waste anymore time explaining the process.

You are free to your opinion. I just wish you operated in my market.

BTW: Pantone was recently purchased by X-Rite. Who are the world market leader in color management equipment and software. They are growing and very healthy. In fact they're only getting bigger and more relevant all the time. They are also at the very leading edge of new digital technologies when it comes to color software and hardware.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Healthy companies with bright futures are seldom acquired ... the cost is too high. Being acquired is typically a lifeline, and not good news. I have no wish for the demise of Pantone, especially not its employees. But I do think it speaks to their waning relevence, especially the PMS system for mixed printer's inks.

Hopefully when when someone requests a Pantone color that is outside the CMYK spectrum (many are), folks can inform based on true statements. If you deem these "excuses" so be it. I think it's being better-informed.

 

[Rooster]

Whatever you say Jim.

Grand Rapids, Michigan, October 24, 2007 - X-Rite, Incorporated (Nasdaq: XRIT) a leading provider of color solutions for measuring, formulating, matching, and simulating color, announced today it has completed the purchase of Pantone, Inc. for a purchase price of 180 million dollars. The transaction was funded exclusively with cash, financed through new borrowings.

Pantone, Inc., headquartered in Carlstadt, New Jersey, is the worldwide market leader in color communication and specification standards in the creative design industries. Its flagship product, the PANTONE® MATCHING SYSTEM®, is the de-facto color standard in the graphic arts, printing, publishing and advertising industries. The company also provides color standards and design tools for the fashion, home furnishings, architecture, paint, interior and industrial design industries. Pantone generated revenues of approximately $42 million in 2006 with adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) of approximately 27% of revenues.

What's 27 percent of 42 Million? I would think that 11+ million dollars is a pretty healthy profit. Obviously X-Rite valued the assets as being higher since they paid 180 million for them. Doesn't sound like much of bailout to me. I don't think they paid over 16 time earnings just to kill them off. But again.... whatever.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Pantone annual gross profits (EBITDA) were in the 30 million range back in the 80s. I don't have historical sales/profit trends, but then again, companies are typically acquired because they're in a bargain state: early before they get expensive; later when they've become less expensive. And the trend, it seems, is south not north ... as one might logically assume when production methods are evolving in a direction that's not beneficial to their flagship product.

But why do you care? Clearly it matters to an extent that you've budgeted more wasted time to our argument. Do you have family members who work for Pantone? Is your own success tied to Pantone technology. What up?