Pantone matching for digital printing

[Rooster]

I have no affiliation with Pantone. I don't even own a Pantone book. No need to. They've provided the LAB specs in the Adobe Creative Suite.

All I've tried to do is spread a little knowledge about making your life where it intersects with color matching simpler. You seem to have a problem in being wrong.

BTW: You must be pretty tight with the Pantone folks yourself to know what kind of revenue they were bringing in in the 80's. Considering they went private in '77 and stayed that way up until the purchase by X-Rite in 07. Or are you simply barking out of your ass and throwing numbers around to try and save your argument?

 

[Jim Doggett]

Considering they went private in '77 and stayed that way up until the purchase by X-Rite in 07. Or are you simply barking out of your ass and throwing numbers around to try and save your argument?

You're right; numbers are tough to find on privately-held companies. It was outlined in a lawsuit made public. Public companies are obviously easier to follow, e.g. X-Rite, which you described as being "...growing and very healthy. "

Things are not quite as bright as they were in Oct 2007. Not sure why, but obviously, the south trend continues.

Best,

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

I have no affiliation with Pantone. I don't even own a Pantone book. No need to. They've provided the LAB specs in the Adobe Creative Suite.

This might explain how you are uniquely able to hit the Pantone spectrum; you're matching to the screen, not a PMS color guide.

Rooster, I am not out to get you, buddy. Really I'm not. With some minimal effort, folks can get close.

But they aren't going to match, and some they won't even get near. So I'd like folks to ask, how important is it? Is mega-accurate spot color printing where the market is trending? Or is material variety (more applications) and lower-cost a greater force in the market? My analysis says the latter is where the trend is going, with a vengence.

I had a motive in looking at that closely, about 5 years ago. I was the Summa marketing guy, and our DC-class thermal transfer printers weren't able to get anywhere near PMS colors. And our head of sales was getting requests for PMS spot printing. So do we develop Pantone-certified colors and try to negate some of the EDGE / Gerber Tone advantage? (also, inkjet was becoming more capable)

As a marketing guy, I had to wonder if the cost-benefit was there.

And in the end, I didn't see the market trending toward PMS capable printing. Indeed, it seemed to be going in the opposite direction. It's still relelevent, to a degree. But only as reference, not the spot-on matching system as it was designed back in the days of mixed printer's ink and Black + 1PMS printing, or 2 PMS or whatever (more colors with a work-and-turn).

And any customer that thinks PMS is the Holy Grail, and busts the chops of a sign-maker printing 4-color, is a pain, in my opinion ... and maybe an understanding of why 4C is not a Pantone color printing system, will help.

In any event, it's a pain that should lessen, not increase.

But it's always fun to banter :^) No hard feelings, Rooster.

Best Regards,

Jim

 

[Rick]

I have to chime in that to some degree it's not going to be relevant to sign shops as most sign shops produce what they design, will send out files to printers who do not do any color correcting other than the software management. Shops hold on to files to other vendors, and attempt to keep as much of the production as possible. If a sign shop is going to deal with a designer, they must charge for the service of color matching, and be able to explain the digital printers inability to hit the Pantone (and most color references)

I have to send files out to multiple vendors and they all need to have the same reference. Some is a Matthews Paint or Akzo, some is EGL, PMS, Scofield, ICI or any other ink, paint or color reference. And occasionally they have to be transferred over to CMYK. CMYK and RGB is never going to work perfectly for a paint or ink match. Without a reference that a person can touch, it will bring varying and usually poor results.

I get drawings from architects and interior designers wanting to match paint colors for print. Try matching an ICI paint color to CMYK.. or Pantone...

I have lots of stories too... like designers spec'ing concrete color, acid stain and neon to PMS colors... it ain't going to happen. But in my type of sign design, with the vendors I push to bid on certain projects, they can match PMS fairly well with Matthews Paint, Akzo Nobel, and some of the digital print vendors. Maybe I am not so hard of a designer to deal with since I used to be a printer/production monkey, pulled a squeegie or 2 and sprayed a few cabinets in my life and trying to match colors on an Edge, Electrostatic printer, and paint. Matching was sometimes a chore if the designer was picky so I understand the complaint. But as a designer, color is an important part of design and some may want to pay for that, just not to the point of hurting the client, or a never ending back and forth.

Lamest ass thing is "calling it as you see it" with the typical 30" monitor and Illustrator designer. This is again the reverse self-righteousness hard at work with no clear argument but spouting out off nothing... the same can be said about the typical self taught hack sign shop who gets a bid and is clueless about the construction, design or print process.

Production is a skill, its more than design on my screen and press print, but to most sign shops and small business, that is good enough. Pressing print is typical of the clueless hack sign shop we all dread that are flowing into this industry. Your argument seems to have softened, but pushing the bar lower may not be what we need in the industry... just press print.... it's that easy.

oh that feels better...

 

[Rooster]

Jim if you think for a second the market is trending away from "accurate" printing then you are just kidding yourself.

Suffice it to say. I'm very pleased that there are people like you in the digital print industry. You only make my job easier.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Hi Rooster,

Not accuracy, per se. But indeed, PMS color-matched is on the wane.

Also, as to Rick's point of lowering standards not being good for the industry, I think I'd say yes and no. (Everything else Rick states I agree with completely) There's been a huge influx of more attainable technology, so that's going to bring more novice ability into the market.

But, I'm not sure that improved efficiency is a bad thing. The process is really streamlined. Companies can upload a PDF and voila! That expands the markets, for sign folks anyway. Design firms, freelancers, pre-press/color houses, maybe not. But folks aren't flying to press-checks. Things are more "get 'r done," which can be a positive. Lower cost, faster turn-around and not sweating the little stuff begets doing more.

Folks who can cater to the high-end have an advantage, clearly. But low-end is the growth market ... maybe hastend by the Web. Loupes and careful press-checks are being replaced by "just put it up on our Web site." So standards are loosened, but activity ramps up dramatically.

That thinking will invariably carry over to catalog and postcard printing ... and wide format. So sorry, Roost, but I think it's kidding oneself to think that trend is not occuring.

BTW, I'm not in the digital printing industry. Merely a casual bystander for a couple decades and change ... most of that time being an executive-level marketing guy.

Best Regards,

Jim

 

[Rick]

Well, geez, thats what I was trying to say before you hair splitting, argumentive shlep!!! Next show I see you, at I'm going to rooster slap you with my PMS fanbook... but being the sporting man I am, watch out for a porky, wild eyed, middle aged guy eating a burrito and holding up his pants.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Well, geez, thats what I was trying to say before you hair splitting, argumentive shlep!!! Next show I see you, at I'm going to rooster slap you with my PMS fanbook... but being the sporting man I am, watch out for a porky, wild eyed, middle aged guy eating a burrito and holding up his pants.

Splitting hairs is what makes the banter so much fun!!! One more reason to avoid shows like te plague ... kidding!!! Burritos on me. We should all three of us go out and argue this stuff properly -- with help of beverage alcohol :^))

Have a great weekend guys .. got a Grisham book to finish.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Rooster]

Yes Jim,

It's always a good thing when industries trend towards lower standards and less accuracy. You are definitely correct. We should welcome this with open arms and embrace it wholeheartedly. I would be a fool to have ever argued otherwise. American ingenuity at it's finest! I must defer to your years of expertise on the subject. I'm sure your company's product development must be run to the same stellar standards you insist the digital print industry is so lucky to be experiencing. I can't wait for next years newer crappier model to arrive!

Obviously you have had to deal with many customers over the years. I'm sure your explanations of "it's not that important" and/or "it's impossible, why bother trying" and the one I do so love the most "It's your own damn fault for picking that stupid color" have gone over well. You've demonstrated nothing but a high level of expertise and knowledge in this thread. Thank you so much for your contributions. I now have a great new arsenal of excuses to offer my clients should I ever desire to offer them an inferior product. [/sarcasm]

 

[kev3232]

come on guys, can't we just all get along? either that, it's gonna be a signs101 smakdown!!

 

[Jim Doggett]

Hi Rooster,

Thanks for the sarcasm notation; I wouldn't have picked up on it otherwise ;^)

Anyway, in marketing we have disciplines, too. The biggy is are we doing what we want or what the customer wants? It's easier, obviously, if we do what the customer wants -- and I'm reeeeeal lazy. Thus, market-focus. Also, indoor plumbing ... albeit, I'm not sure who is in fact peeing into the wind on this one. (Sorry; that's I lie. I am sure I know who is.)

What is, is. Tons of low-cost ecosol printers flooding the market with stuff that buyers seem to want since they're buying both the technology and output, en masse. At the same time, the leader in high-end color workflow products, X-Rite/Pantone, is hemmoraging millions in quarterly losses ... and has for a couple years, beginning almost to the day they acquired Pantone.

Doing more with less is increaslingly driving business buying decisions. That's amplified by a tightening in the economy -- but is merely one nail in the X-Rite/Pantone coffin. The other is that the technoloigy is so amazingly good. Wide format printers got about 3 times as good as they need to be the moment Epson put printheads on Roland, Mutoh and Mimaki printers.

The low-end is high-end, practically out-of-the-box.

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

come on guys, can't we just all get along? either that, it's gonna be a signs101 smakdown!!

I tried, but alas, I failed. :^)

 

[bbeens]

this thread was going somewhere interesting, then ... took a turn into two people arguing and i don't think they are arguing about the same thing. Distaste for Pantone does not equate to lower quality or less accurate color matching. Rooster has obviously worked hard to develop his color management process and I can't think of anything wrong with what he has described - well... maybe the comment about higher resolutions = larger gamut. This requires that the device dot size is not reduced when increasing resolution. Many printers will not allow larger fixed dots or variable dot modes in their highest resolutions. Epson and Roland printers come to mind.

in response to Kev - i was lumping those disagreeable 'designers' in with my statement of 'people in the digital print world'.

 

[astro8]

CMYKOrGr printer?

Printer with more effing color channels still?

Jim

Jim, I can see your point of view, after years of frustration with colour 'matching' ('simulation' is what I prefer to call it) this solution seems to address my problems with colour matching and Pantone issues.

After all is said and done..the customer or designer wants what they want...anything else to them is an excuse.

Start talking about CMYK as the industry standard, blah, blah, blah and their eyes glaze over fairly quickly.

They want what they want...if they can't get it from you with your CMYK printer...they'll come to me.

What we should be doing is increasing our colour output, not trying to mute it.

I actively inform the designers that supply files to me to spec PMS colours in their files.

Hold up a Trumatch swatchbook next to a Pantone book....see the difference? (I know you can, I'm just trying to make a point).

What a multi-colour inkset printer does is that it allows you far more scope.

I no longer have to use a lot of solid colour cut vinyl in signs because my CMYK or CMYK+Lc,Lm printer can't achieve certain colours and I've reduced production times and costs by doing so.

I print it.

 

[Jim Doggett]

They want what they want...if they can't get it from you with your CMYK printer...they'll come to me.

Perhaps :^)

But if I understand the technology, and inform the prospect, maybe they'll buy what I have to sell them.

Plus, they're a dying breed. (the Pantone-faithful) Fewer will demand it, and are demanding it, with each passing day.

Some here have countered that Pantone is the reference standard, still. And to watch out for what's coming next ... that Pantone is taking it to the next level and will be a dominant force in the market. Well, will they be?

Or is Pantone battling obsolesence ... and on the way down? I think all objective evidence points to this conclusion, unequivocally.

If you have the ability to serve this market (the Pantone-faithful), great. If not, would I advise investing time and money to serve it? I don't think so, especially not in the US market. Canada, maybe; it's a more Europeanized society/market. And the market in Europe has historically been higher-end, with greater investment in equipment and training. But that too is changing. Cost reduction is the driving market force, in Texas, Alberta and Brussels alike.

Maybe I'm wrong. If so, buy up their stock ... it's at a near 5-year low and has been downgraded by virtually every analyst of note. If it rebounds to where it was just 18 months ago, you'll see a 900% return. In truth, this might not be a bad investment. They're realigning, it seems, into vertical niches: automotive and apparel, where pigments are king and exacting color reproduction is critical. These are potentially lucrative markets, and the stock could well rebound ... maybe not to historical levels, but a doubling or tripling is not unrealistic. But the mainstream graphics arts market, I don't think so. The technology is going in a different direction.

My $0.02,

Jim

 

[astro8]

I agree with you on Pantone losing it's 'be all and end all' status, but I do get to quote more and more Pantone spec'd artwork everyday.

I suppose for me, as a sign maker, it's not all about Pantone per se...it's about hitting colours. Pantone, paint swatches, vinyl colours etc.

I've had clients bring in a mandarin or a paint swatch they've found and asked if I can 'match' it.

Yep, spectro it, get the values, print out "similiar colours" in the RIP.

Select from the fifty/hundred or so swatches and that's usually it. If it isn't close enough, (which I haven't come across yet by the way) at least I don't sit there thinking "What if?"

Multi-inkset printers have actually made colour 'matching' which was once a hair-pulling exercise into routine for me.

This thread started off about trying to match Pantone colours..I don't look at colours as being Pantone or Trumatch or whatever, like I used to..I just look at colours.

Colours... Pantone or otherwise can't be 'matched' by laying down dots of different colour inks as we do. It's all about perception, deception and simulation. The more colour inks you have to choose from for your 'dots', the more likely you are to simulate the colour.

It's an interesting thread...

 

[Jim Doggett]

All good and valid points ... and an exceptional approach. I think Bbean's point, too, is noteworthy. Not hitting Pantone colors, which process color does not do, does not equate to low quality by any means.

Quality these days is stupid good, even at 720 by 720 ... high speed, big images and it's desktop printer quality. I simply cannot imagine anyone not being blown away at how good the prints look ... so if the Pantone 1585 C orange is off a bit, the "OMG this looks great" factor can compensate and probably overcome. And no doubt, 4C+OG is going to get closer to 1585 than a 4C printer will, maybe even much closer. But it isn't going to be Pantone whatever on C1S stock. It's vinyl, not coated paper.

Blues and Reds, however, CMYK nails consistently. Kudos to Coke and IBM for choosing corporate colors that reproduce everywhere (a lesson plan for art schools to consider?)

Plus printed swatches is absolutely the way to go. Kudos again. Let the customer circle the color they want and move on.

But if they're folding over the print and laying it across a Pantone swatch / chip, you're going to have to have the blah-blah-blah chat, regardless of which process color printer you're using. Less blah-blah-blah with 4+OG in some cases, but the chat will nevertheless be had if the customer isn't already in tune with "close = best possible outcome."

So I guess my objective in all my blather is this: I think folks need to be prepared to have the chat, and not feel that they're screwing up or making excuses when they do. The noobs with the loupe and the Pantone chip need some schoolin' in the real world; they ain't in art school no more.

IMHO,

Jim

 

[Rooster]

Damn those evil bastards at Pantone and their nefarious book of colors.

Damn them, damn them all to hell.

Explain to me if you will please Jim, how the same color on vinyl is somehow different than the color in the swatch book? Also how are the colors from pantone any different than those we come across in the wild. What makes them so much more difficult to match than the rest of the colors in world that surround us?

 

[Jim Doggett]

Explain to me if you will please Jim, how the same color on vinyl is somehow different than the color in the swatch book?

Gloss level, buddy. Pantone has different color guides for uncoated and coated paper; vinyl is at another level entirely.

I don't think Pantone evil, merely less relevant in a process-printed and projected-light RGB world. Corporate communication simply evolved in a direction that no longer suited a color-matching system designed for mixed printer's inks. I think they're a player in automotive, apparel and manufacturing, where pigments and exact color matching is relevant. I wish them nothing but success in that regard. But in the broader graphic arts market, and corporate communication in particular, they're dying on the vine (lost well over $100 million in the last year alone).

The market is a brutal indicator of what's relevant. Sorry, man. But it is what it is.

Jim

 

[Rooster]

So if I were to print an offset job and expect to match a pantone book I would then have to print on the same paper as the pantone book is printed on. Or one that has an identical white point and gloss level. This what you're saying, correct? Otherwise I will not be printing an acceptable match to their colors?

I would also never be be able to match their color swatches using any sort or additional gloss coating (varnish, aqueous, UV, etc)? Correct?