Proofing - the best way

[beermonster]

ok - hello and good 20th to America
hi to another normal day for the rest of us
question> when proofing is it best to match your proofer to the press or make the press match the proofer?
the proofer most probably being the most stable and consistent out of the two.
if you match proofer to press then you will be taking in dot gain (therefore not totally accurate) and when it come to press - there will be additional dot gain again - make sense?
discuss

[Stiv]

We match the proof to the press.
The CTP device is linearized and the press has been fingerprinted beforehand.
I am not saying the plates are output as linear though. They have a linear curve applied and then the press gain curve is applied. Each press has its own curve.

[Chelle]

Our guys are SUPPOSED to try to match the proof. It isn't always going to be possible, obviously, if they are running PMS since the proof will be a CMYK, but it gives them an idea of what the final product is SUPPOSED to look like.

[PrepressCrapFixer]

I believe the best practice is to have the proofer match the press but that also assumes that the press is running to a consistant standard at all times.  If the press room doesn't control it's environment, then it will be impossible to match all the time.  Kind of like the chicken or the egg question, eh?

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

You match the proofer to the press. Is it like pissing up a rope?... absolutely, but that's how it's done. We use the G7 standard here. Basically a set of plates are made with no curve, straight linear. The target Press runs it. Then we scan it in, and calibrate to the press. Another run is made, there it is determined if the proofer is on, or we go back to calibrating. Then, about once a week, we run calibration on the proofer more to make sure it is staying within parameters.

If we are even remotely off, the General Manager is in here pissing a fit about color!

[Chelle]

Sounds about right, DCS. I might have mis-stated in my first post. We calibrate all the time too. But if we don't give our pressmen something to "match" to, they are constantly in here crying. :angry:

[born2print]

You match the proofer to the press. Is it like pissing up a rope?... absolutely, but that's how it's done. We use the G7 standard here. Basically a set of plates are made with no curve, straight linear. The target Press runs it. Then we scan it in, and calibrate to the press. Another run is made, there it is determined if the proofer is on, or we go back to calibrating. Then, about once a week, we run calibration on the proofer more to make sure it is staying within parameters.

If we are even remotely off, the General Manager is in here pissing a fit about color!

What he said, except we have a patch on every proof that is read by an i1 and will get a pass/fail on the fly.

[beermonster]

ok - nice info - cheers folks
right - i have a digital cromalin B2 and a hp5000
replacement solution:
epson 9900, efi xxl rip (possibly oris or gmg - gotta compare pricing etc)
plan:
get rid of two proofers into one. profiled to press, new technology, NOW technology, unlikely to be dropped (like dupants did with cromalin) in near future
downside:
potential bottleneck work wise
upside - i get to faff with a new system :laugh:

[whoami]

I'm not 100% sure if this is different than matching a proof to the press or vice versa.  To me it's neither but here it is...

What we do is try to match the data set from G7 on our proofing device.  Once we verify that we are as close as we can get through comparing our data set to their data set using an app called measure tool then we check that proofing device off the list.  For our press we run the GRACoL 7 charts and read them in using IdeaLink.  This gives us a curve which we apply to the plate.  Then we run a verification run and compare the press data set to the G7 data set. 

When we run a job we run a few rounds of proofs and when we are happy with the color/content we take that proof out to the press and run our press up to color and see if it matches the proof.  It works 90% of the time. 

[frailer]

You match the proofer to the press. Is it like pissing up a rope?... absolutely, but that's how it's done. We use the G7 standard here. Basically a set of plates are made with no curve, straight linear. The target Press runs it. Then we scan it in, and calibrate to the press. Another run is made, there it is determined if the proofer is on, or we go back to calibrating. Then, about once a week, we run calibration on the proofer more to make sure it is staying within parameters.

If we are even remotely off, the General Manager is in here pissing a fit about color!

Pretty much what DCS said; except for the bit after "Then, once a week..." We get off pretty lightly on that score. 2 Komoris only...been pretty stable. Last time our Fuji proofing guy came, he set us up to the new Aussie Standard, which is pretty much Euroscale Coated, V.2, am led to believe. I have to edumacate myself further on this though.    :undecided:

[beermonster]

mmm its a funneh thing

i'm with you guys that you profile to press

however

the latest ISO says you make press match the proofer, after proofer has been verified as stable and true - i1 set up there, and then bring press in line with proof - theory being that the proofer is the most stable in the process, easiest to verify with in line spectro etc and easiest to keep at same consistent level.

the software gives a printed label to pass or reject depending on D.E. and conformance to i think fogra, and away ya go

interesting - the guys on coal face profile/match presses - the "techs" do the reverse :undecided:

[rotarypower3]

I've never understood the whole getting the proofer to match the press rubbish. 
Your proofer "should" always be a million times more stable than a press.
I get the proofs to match ISO 12647, then there is no excuses, the press HAS to match the proof.  :grin:

..

[beck]

You match the proofer to the press. Is it like pissing up a rope?... absolutely, but that's how it's done. We use the G7 standard here. Basically a set of plates are made with no curve, straight linear. The target Press runs it. Then we scan it in, and calibrate to the press. Another run is made, there it is determined if the proofer is on, or we go back to calibrating. Then, about once a week, we run calibration on the proofer more to make sure it is staying within parameters.

If we are even remotely off, the General Manager is in here pissing a fit about color!

Exactly what DCS said.

We're starting all over again tomorrow with our profiling...they fired up our new press over the weekend.  Now the fun starts  :wink:

beck

[Edgar]

Hello compadres!

The best way to reach a good match is:
- Optimize the presses every 5-6 months
- Once optimized, profile that presses
- When profiling use G7 to reach SWOP, Gracol, etc.
- Once you have the profile and the selected sheets of the press run, calibrate your proofer using your press profile.
- Check the calibration result and compare it to your press sheets. Check its Delta E.

This is the proof to press way and you can reach good results when keeping the press and proofer conditions. Proofers are very stable but presses normally need to give good maintenance for process control.

Hey guys! I know that it is an old topic but I like this so I can't wait for give my 2 cents.

[Edgar]

Hey guys! What can I do to be a "special" member in this forum without making tons of posts?

I'm only 46 posts.