Do your proofs alwawys match

[Farabomb]

I have one pressman complaining about matching the proofs. He has the bosses under the impression it's the plates, the chemical, the moon, anything but him. Our night pressman tells me yes, we have to push the yellow and at times the red to get close enough. My brother is under the impression that you can always match the proof. I'm under the impression that there will always be a slight variation and it can be worse in certain colors. Does everyone match the proofs exactly? We'll be moving soon and I will have 2 presses I'll have to fight with and honestly, with all the band-aid fixes we have done I have no idea where we are. I feel we should start at square one with the move but my brother thinks nothing is going to change press/color wise with the move. My one pressman is saying different and honestly I think so as well. Everything is changing including the water (hopefully a RO system) so I'm inclined to believe him. 

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

How often do you calibrate?

[Joe]

I've never seen a proof matched exactly in 31 years. Close but no cigar.

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

I agree with Joe... but weekly calibration is essential.

[Farabomb]

The kodak software shuts down the proofer after 7 days and makes you calibrate. Even when it was new the proofs never matched exactly but as stated above, it was close enough. Problem is my brother listens to sales slime and believes they can always match every color (except spots) even though he's been around long enough and had more than enough press OKs to know better. He was also the most hated salesman at the old place when it came to presschecks because he always thought he could run the press better than the pressman. Come to think about it there are a lot of things he thinks he can do better than more experienced people but that never stops him from adding his $.02.

[frailer]

Always a worry. Things 'drift', over time. Travel pretty well here on Plack Magic/Epson. But we're due for a linearisation. Gonna follow Fuji guy on next one; do it myself after that. Sometimes you get press 'issues', like too much density in changed weather, (they don't use denso'd here, though I've got one they can use). This can coincide with things drifting in proofing. Then ya got problems, as we did a few months back. If out printers were aviators, their mentality would be in the Sopwith Camel era.    :rolleyes:   All set-of-the-pants flying.   

[Farabomb]

Oh, forgot to add that the building owners shut off the AC because of owed back rent of one of the partners so as of now it's 89F in the coldest room.

[frailer]

Oh, forgot to add that the building owners shut off the AC because of owed back rent of one of the partners so as of now it's 89F in the coldest room.

Nice...   :sad:

[beermonster]

nothing ever matches perfectly - tolerances of manufacture i'm afraid

i'd dump the kodal stuff and get a gmg and epson 9900 - awesome set up

[beermonster]

kodal>icelandic for kodaK

[rotarypower3]

We get pretty close most of the time.

At the start of the year we got a new press. Of course prepress (me) is expected to know and be able to do everything! So I had to fingerprint the press to ISO standards (already proofing to them). It all went well, got it perfect on the 2nd set of plate curves and away we went.
But now, over the last couple of weeks the printers have been windging about not being able to match the proofs anymore. I go away and check the proofs, yep still meeting ISO. Show the printers the evidence, but they still insist it's something in prepress of course! :angry:
So today we put my test plates back on, run to the same densities that I'd detirmined from the fist press test and measured away. Well, well, the "nothing wrong with the press" press has "worn in" and all the dot gains have changed which means they can't match the proofs anymore..... 

I hate having to prove my departments innocence all the time, but dam I love it I prove myself right!   :laugh:


..

[youston]

kodal>icelandic for kodaK

I thought you were a Scot. Now I'm going to have to re-calibrate my brain to read your posts in an Icelandic accent.  :angry:

[beck]

We get pretty close most of the time.

At the start of the year we got a new press. Of course prepress (me) is expected to know and be able to do everything! So I had to fingerprint the press to ISO standards (already proofing to them). It all went well, got it perfect on the 2nd set of plate curves and away we went.
But now, over the last couple of weeks the printers have been windging about not being able to match the proofs anymore. I go away and check the proofs, yep still meeting ISO. Show the printers the evidence, but they still insist it's something in prepress of course! :angry:
So today we put my test plates back on, run to the same densities that I'd detirmined from the fist press test and measured away. Well, well, the "nothing wrong with the press" press has "worn in" and all the dot gains have changed which means they can't match the proofs anymore..... 

I hate having to prove my departments innocence all the time, but dam I love it I prove myself right!   :laugh:

Same boat here.  New press about a year ago.  We are on our 2nd "Re-Fingerprint" next week.  So far, it hasn't move much at all - VERY SLIGHT tweaks to the plate curves.

As to proofs matching.  4/C Process hits almost 100% of the time.  Spot colors not so much.  We will adjust the Oris software to try to make the spots look closer (to avoid customer rejection), but our proofs state that all Pantone colors will be ran to the book.  If it is questioned, we'll tell them we will run to the Pantone book or the customer signed ink drawdown for a special mix.

When the pressroom comes to us saying it doesn't match, we do not EVER make adjustments until they give us a press sheet at perfect densities.  Amazing how often proper densities on the press = acceptable color on press.

beck

[Captain_Type]

A press does not even match itself...on the same press sheet.

There are variations from sheet to sheet, from one spot on the sheet to another.

All you can ever hope for is to match "on average."

[David]

We get really close here, but there are just too many variables in printing that you just can't account for in proofing.
You can't really make a good Epson on uncoated stock, you can't really proof metallic inks, you can't really proof PMS colors, etc. Wet ink on paper versus anything made today for proofing just doesn't get it totally right
And nowadays, with the client specing cheaper stocks, and with paper mills making so many weird ass papers, it can be a daunting process to try to match ALL proofs on press. There has to be a little understanding of the variances so that you can come to a happy medium.


...and we have the same problem with reprints, the same press can't match itself a few weeks or months later.