Proofer Profile

[Santa]

Installed a new Proofer a few months ago and trying to fine tune the color.  My old way of proofing was to profile it to our press...i.e run a set of swatches on press, read em in, create a profile, optimize to profile.

Installer talked to me about running to a standard i.e SWOP or Gracol so trying to see what the opinions are on either side.

[DCurry]

Your installer is correct. A shop I used to work in did it backwards, too, but then when anything changes on the press you wind up chasing color on your proofer. It's better to proof to a known condition (like SWOP or Gracol) so you know your proofs are always right. When something doesn't match, you can verify the proof and rule out that variable when troubleshooting.

[born2print]

In a nutshell, we profile to GraCol (G7) and then the presses are supposed to start at normal house densities and go from there. We also run a ton of GCR though so they can't move color on press as much as the days before GCR.
Profiling to a press just doesn't seem to be the way to go in the long run, for instance, what if you have a bunch of different presses?

[David]

we do gracol and swop, and all the others too. We can output to all standards, even match the stupid proofs off your inkjet printer at home.
it's a PITA, but it works great.

[andyfest]

Installed a new Proofer a few months ago and trying to fine tune the color.  My old way of proofing was to profile it to our press...i.e run a set of swatches on press, read em in, create a profile, optimize to profile.

Installer talked to me about running to a standard i.e SWOP or Gracol so trying to see what the opinions are on either side.

We installed our new proofer using the GraCol 7 standard. It doesn't make sense to chase the press anymore when all of our clients generally run to that standard. Besides our pressmen don't know shit from putty.