Pantone matching for digital printing

[Jim Doggett]

Correct. I think you're starting to get a sense of where printing has gone since Gutenberg printed a Bible. Pantone's glory days were when 2-color sheet-fed printers sprang up in every town in America, and elsewhere. Cover or text stock; coated and uncoated.

Web offset came came into vogue, and then evolved and became more affordable. Flood gloss, ultra varnish, flood dull, brightness, opacity, etc., etc. Companies (smart ones) began to wonder if busting their humps to match a color was cost-justified, or even if it's that important. Turns out, not much; it's a supporting cast element. And close is absolutely adequate, for this reason: it's tough to own the color.

Orange and Blue; is it ING or AT&T/Cingular?

Now for shape and position, which I mentioned mattered more about 20 posts ago (way more, in fact):

Once-bitten apple (Mac)
Swoosh (Nike)
Text with notched "o" (Microsoft)

Color, not so important. And if you use it effectively, others follow rapidly. Orange is the color of the new millenium, in that regard, to the extreme ... a bazzillion companies got on that bandwagon. So what company is Orange? Answer: a bunch of them. But the ones that come to mind do so because they were branded in ways that matter.

Pantone's color of the century, I don't recall ... but they have a new color of the year, every decade and so on ... which a couple people who work for Pantone can name without having to look it up. They fell in love with their product, got too attached and forgot to fall in love with the market. They're now in major difficulty. If a company doesn't acquire them, they'll be gone in a year, if the last rights being said about them is to be believed.

I don't wish that. If it would save a single Pantone employee's job, I'd recant everything I've said here. But this thread isn't nearly that important. At best, maybe some who read it will be better able to deal with the lingering effects of expectations brought on from an antiquated system (Pantone).

Next question, please.

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

oops, addendum in re: "brand" (I seem to recall you thought I was speaking of a logo earlier in our kibitzing)

Not true. Brand as it realtes to me:

Trademark: Jim Doggett
Logo: maybe my picture in the top left
Brand: smart-ass; know-it-all; asshole

Branding is a process of creating a feeling around your product and company. Whether your logo and other trademark elements are Pantone 485, 486, 487, or whatever, it matters very little. Volvos are safe; what color makes you feel they're safe?

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Rooster]

How many customers, designers, corporate communication departments and agency art directors have you worked with in the real world to come this conclusion?

What volume of print media using what different types of reproduction methods have you either produced or sold to clients such as these?

What are your qualifications in the area of color measurement and reproduction to have us believe your position is valid.

How does the accepted use of ISO standard 13655 in the measurement of color tristimulus values and the use of CIE standard 1391 (2 degree field of view) relate to a medias gloss level. ie: is this standard designed to provide a measurement of color on various medias that minimizes or standardizes the effect of gloss, or is as you assert gloss level variation an insurmountable obstacle to an acceptable color match. Furthermore, how does pantone's acceptance of and adherence to this standard affect my ability to determine a color match? How much delta e variation is considered acceptable?

I'm having a lot of difficulty believing that Pantone's glory days were in the late 70's and early 80's prior to the introduction of desktop publishing. Could you please state the source of where you determined their "profits" were in the 30 million dollar range in the 1980's. I know that the last year they reported earnings as a public company in 1977 they had "revenues" of 2 million dollars. Would this not represent simply astronomical growth during that period?

I also know that they showed an ~50% increase in sales between 2006 and 2008 going from 167 million to over 240 million. While they may now be part of the X-rite product line and under their corporate umbrella (as a separate division). Can you explain how this level of growth relates to your insistence that they are in a decline and becoming increasingly irrelevant?

Do you think that X-Rite's leveraging of debt to purchase Gretag MacBeth, and more recently Pantone Corporation combined with the downturn in the economy and the increase in corporate borrowing costs might have some effect on X-rite's stock price? What exactly is the relationship between Pantone's increased revenues and these aforementioned events? Does X-rite's stock price trump the earnings from the pantone division. ie: If Pantone shows growth it's irrelevant since X-rite's stock price is in the dumper. Would this be an accurate summation of your position?

How does your position relate to the industry trends of more color management, larger gamut devices, built in spectrophotometers and increased print quality of new machines being released? Am I to understand that this is all just unnecessary overkill being produced for a market that has no underlying need for it?

 

[Jim Doggett]

How many customers, designers, corporate communication departments and agency art directors have you worked with in the real world to come this conclusion?

1. Far too few; ignorance abounds, as does dogmatic thinking, which has no place in marketing.

2. I'll school you, but you have to do your own research: Pantone Net Profit. (Google it; it was in a UK based lawsuit ... 20M+ Pound Sterling ... $30 million US was conservative)

3. I don't need to speculate on what brought X-Rite/Pantone to the brink of disaster. Top XRIT management will have a litany of perfectly good reasons for their problems, due to events beyond their control. Poor management probably won't be on the list.

My guess, however, is they lost sight of what they were. They fell in love with the chips (the shape is a Pantone registered trademark). It defined them as a company and their products. But Pantone was never a color guide or color chip company ... they solved color problems for the print industry. (guides and chips were incidental)

They should have been ahead of the curve when the technology -- and problems in the print industry -- changed. They didn't; they clung to products that created as many problems as they solved. They were very late to the party on process / digital solutions, when they should have been years ahead of the technology-change.

Short answer: poor management.

This is fun. Let's keep going.

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

Oops, missed one:

Am I to understand that this is all just unnecessary overkill being produced for a market that has no underlying need for it?

Yes, to overkill. Too much emphasis is placed on it -- in corporate / marketing communication. Packaging? Not overkill. Thus my belief they're still viable in manufacuring.

-J

 

[Rooster]

I noticed you managed to avoid my questions about how accepted measurement standards relate to determining an acceptable color match. Is there a particular reason for this? Do you still stick to the notion that people will not accept a color match to a pantone chip unless it's printed on an identical stock to the pantone guide books?

Re: Pantone v. Puttnick. How do earnings of £11,904.93 somehow become 30 Million USD. Even considering the Pound was trading at 61.1 pence to the US dollar in 1987 your assertion of a conservative estimate seems a tad off. Although on this point I shall concede since we're dealing solely with European operations and US operation numbers are impossible to come by. The profits and growth shown since 1977 seem to be very impressive.

Indeed the 80's must have been a magical boom time with the birth of desktop publishing and pantone's licensing agreements with so many different software publishers at the time. Industry consolidation and the reduction of potential licensees over the next decade or so would have reduced their bargaining power somewhat. Gone or mostly irrelevant are now letraset, multi-ad, aldus, corel, et al.

However, I was not asking you to speculate on the current fiscal health of X-rite. I was only asking you how pantone's 50% sales growth over the last two fiscal years reported could be interpreted as being part of a downward trend. Indeed I will agree that X-Rite is not exactly making money hand over fist. I still do not see how you can paint the pantone division with the same brush as the parent company when one shows growth and the other shows contraction. Although your marketing experience has provided you with a enviable skill to word your answer to wisely skirt answering the actual question posed. As you done with most of my questions. Touché! You pose a difficult moving target when you duck and dodge a direct answer.

If you can provide a reasonable explanation of your position to the above question we can lay the matter of pantone's health and relevance to rest. It seems a tad moot anyhow since it's out there and people are using it. As you're so fond of saying "what is, is". So we can then move forward on the topic of actual color matching.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Gross buddy, 21+ M BPS, which in 1987 was north of $33 million ... scroll back some pages. Gotta compare apples to apples.

For fuzzy math, you only need to go up a couple posts. 43% growth is not ~50%, even with the US-CDN exchange rate :^) Also, not growth so much as grafting-on. Gretag Macbeth grafted-on in Jul 06 (they were north of $500 million in 2003); then Pantone in Oct 07.

Aldus (Paul Brainerd, who coined the phrase Desktop Publishing, or DTP) launch PageMaker in 1985. But Pantone predates DTP. Paste-up, which DTP replaced, had a Pantone chip on nearly every board.

Anyway, if the crux of your challege is they were on the rise prior to the downturn in the global economy, that's wrong. RIT had a keen sense of smell for companies on the wane. And they were in freefall before the housing crash and economic crisis.

Having fun yet?

J

 

[Jim Doggett]

I noticed you managed to avoid my questions about how accepted measurement standards relate to determining an acceptable color match.

We avoided many a question, going both ways. But if we're keeping track, which color makes you feel Volvo cars are safe?

As far as acceptable, too subjective. I gotta go with I don't know. But it's pretty broad if the measure is effectiveness. Retail packaging competes on a shelf with myriad competing products. Tone gets real important in that environment. In marketing/ads/signs, it's pretty much what's need for recognition, if effectiveness is the measure of "acceptable" ... wiggle room is huge ... if the Coke can is red (bright; pleasing) and not magenta, bingo. Really, it's that broad.

But if your business is selling color guides or a service that touts the color guide as being important, I can understand that's not something you'd want too many folks to know. Ignorance is bliss, and many businesses thrive on it. So don't kick yourself. Keep on keepin' on. Just be careful about assuming things coming from ones rectum, when they might actually be better-informed.

Just a tip; lesson over.

Jim

 

[Rooster]

So let's summarize your position then.

1: You have no real experience or qualifications to comment on the actual use and sale of print media.

2: You have zero experience, qualifications or relevant skills to comment on the use of and effectiveness of color management technologies.

3: When it comes to what's considered an acceptable match you say that it's simply too subjective. A vastly different position from your "it's simply not possible", or "it's not that important" position earlier.

4: After saying that it's simply not possible to achieve a match to a pantone color to a clients satisfaction unless you run on a virtually identical stock. Your position has changed to "wiggle room is huge".

5: I'm not sure how to really qualify your position on the business end as you move the numbers around to suit your argument. If you check x-rite's financial statement for the first quarter of 2009 they show a "gross profit" of 26.8 million dollars for a single quarter. Of course I actually run a business and understand the only thing that matters at the end of the day is net profit. Thus my reasoning for focusing on that. Little things like payroll, marketing expenses, and overhead items tend to eat into the actual gross profit margin determined simply by subtracting cost of product from revenue from sale of product. It seems your understanding of color management and customer relations relating to color matching accuracy might actually be even greater than your understanding of how business works from the financial side. Of course you've probably only ever cashed a paycheck in your life. Why should the finer points of corporate finance give you any bother.

If you really want to continue this discussion I will get you a larger shovel since you seem so determined to keep digging deeper into the hole you've dug for yourself. The lesson, Mr. Doggett, is hardly over.

Oh and the color blue that makes me feel safe in a Volvo would be the same color they use for their brand identity and corporate marketing. They've spent many millions to attach that message to their identity. The two go hand in hand. When you see the name Volvo most people immediately think safe or perhaps Swedish, but safe is right up there regardless. Considering you're using that as the basis of your argument you can hardly claim that is has no effect on the consumer. They've obviously gotten into your head with it. Specifically that color would be Pantone 072c. They would specify the use of that color the same way they specify the use of their own custom fonts in their advertising. If you had any real world experience in any aspect of the print or advertising industries besides selling squeegees, racks and an antiquated old thermal ribbon print system. You might understand some of the actual things we as business owners and production professionals have to deal with in our day to day duties. When it's important to a customer. It becomes important to me. If it means getting a project or seeing it go to the competition. The experience and skills I've acquired over the years become very relevant indeed.

And yes, in case you're wondering. I can attain a color match to it that would be acceptable according to ISO standards. Not on many medias though. It takes a high cyan/magenta ink load and a media with a very high white point. You have to push things pretty hard for a "true" match.

 

[astro8]

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?

...That's probably the best question in this thread.

Forget PMS Numbers and just look at the colour for what it is. Then ask yourself...'How do I match that?"

Then you are on the road to successful colour management and output.

 

[ProWraps™]

wow.. L O N G E S T R E P L Y S EVVVVVERRRRR. hell now im confused and i started this thread. heh.

 

[Jim Doggett]

So let's summarize your position then.

1: You have no real experience or qualifications to comment on the actual use and sale of print media.

2: You have zero experience, qualifications or relevant skills to comment on the use of and effectiveness of color management technologies.

3: When it comes to what's considered an acceptable match you say that it's simply too subjective. A vastly different position from your "it's simply not possible", or "it's not that important" position earlier.

4: After saying that it's simply not possible to achieve a match to a pantone color to a clients satisfaction unless you run on a virtually identical stock. Your position has changed to "wiggle room is huge".

5: I'm not sure how to really qualify your position on the business end as you move the numbers around to suit your argument. If you check x-rite's financial statement for the first quarter of 2009 they show a "gross profit" of 26.8 million dollars for a single quarter. Of course I actually run a business and understand the only thing that matters at the end of the day is net profit. Thus my reasoning for focusing on that. Little things like payroll, marketing expenses, and overhead items tend to eat into the actual gross profit margin determined simply by subtracting cost of product from revenue from sale of product. It seems your understanding of color management and customer relations relating to color matching accuracy might actually be even greater than your understanding of how business works from the financial side. Of course you've probably only ever cashed a paycheck in your life. Why should the finer points of corporate finance give you any bother.

If you really want to continue this discussion I will get you a larger shovel since you seem so determined to keep digging deeper into the hole you've dug for yourself. The lesson, Mr. Doggett, is hardly over.

Oh and the color blue that makes me feel safe in a Volvo would be the same color they use for their brand identity and corporate marketing. They've spent many millions to attach that message to their identity. The two go hand in hand. When you see the name Volvo most people immediately think safe or perhaps Swedish, but safe is right up there regardless. Considering you're using that as the basis of your argument you can hardly claim that is has no effect on the consumer. They've obviously gotten into your head with it. Specifically that color would be Pantone 072c. They would specify the use of that color the same way they specify the use of their own custom fonts in their advertising. If you had any real world experience in any aspect of the print or advertising industries besides selling squeegees, racks and an antiquated old thermal ribbon print system. You might understand some of the actual things we as business owners and production professionals have to deal with in our day to day duties. When it's important to a customer. It becomes important to me. If it means getting a project or seeing it go to the competition. The experience and skills I've acquired over the years become very relevant indeed.

And yes, in case you're wondering. I can attain a color match to it that would be acceptable according to ISO standards. Not on many medias though. It takes a high cyan/magenta ink load and a media with a very high white point. You have to push things pretty hard for a "true" match.

Uncle. You win. I'm the bitch, well-slapped.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

...That's probably the best question in this thread.

Forget PMS Numbers and just look at the colour for what it is. Then ask yourself...'How do I match that?"

Then you are on the road to successful colour management and output.

Hi Astro,

But then, what PMS green do you need before your mind registers, "oh; it's a tree" ...?

How accurate must the green be? And when the leaves turn yellow, then orange is there any confusion as to whether it's a tree? Does if help if the yellow is Pantone XXX and the Orange is Pantone YYY? No doubt there are unnatural-looking yellows and oranges, at which point you'd question if the tree was real ... but the "wiggle room" is broad.

Point being: color plays a roll in the recognition process, but a much smaller roll than Pantone/Pantone-dweebs would have us think. Shape trumps.

Best,

Jim

 

[Jim Doggett]

More on shape trumps ...

OK; so now we know it's a tree, due to its shape and because it's within the bounds of a fairly broad tonal range. So we begin accruing all the brand attributes:

- Shading (keeps me cool on a hot day)
- Fun (I can climb it and swing from its branches)
- Leafy (I'll have to rake ... some brand attributes are negative ... Volvos are safe; also boxy ... Listerine is more effective at killing the stuff that makes my breath stink; but it tastes like ass)

That's the objective: regonition in pursuit of associations/emotional responses (brand attributes)


Color helps, to a degree, in the recognition process. It does squat in branding. But graphic artists, most of whom seem to think they're marketing experts, will school us in the vital importance of exacting color.

Ergo the axiom: a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Jim

 

[Correct Color]

Actually and just for the record...

If you have really solid professionally-made printer profiles, you quickly find that PMS colors go from being your enemy to being your very best friend.

Reason is that despite the old canard about PMS books not matching, they do, and when your RIP is looking for a known quantity--the Lab value of a PMS color--it will find it in your printer space even if you've got your incoming spaces set up incorrectly, assuming that your printer profile was made by someone who knows what they're doing with software that didn't come out of a box of Cracker Jacks.

However, the farther your printer profiles are from the reality of your printer, the more likely your RIP will simply be interpreting the PMS call as the wrong color in your print space.

The idea that RGB or CMYK values will ever replace PMS colors is--sorry--not very likely to happen--and again, sorry--displays some lack of understanding of the principles of digital color.

For there to be universal CMYK or RGB values to represent certain colors, there would have to be agreement on which RGB or CMYK spaces would be used, or each color would have to have differing values depending on the RGB or CMYK spaces to be used.

And since most commercial print CMYK spaces are pretty small, then what of the colors that fall outside of them? Do they just cease to exist?

Not likely.

No. PMS colors are here to stay, and learning to put them to work for you is what a good part of what separates those who understand their business from those who pretend to.