by Shelby Sapusek on January 18, 2012
This was originally posted on JimRaffel.com on Jan. 9, 2007. It has been revised for this blog. You can view the original here.
At the close of 2006, ColorMetrix CEO Jim Raffel presented three proofing New Year’s resolutions, which he promised to expand upon in 2007. Resolution #1 stated that printers should “increase productivity by decreasing time wasted to re-print bad proofs.” It sounds simple; and it can be.
First, printers must start measuring the color bar they output on every proof with process control software, such as ColorMetrix’s ProofPass. Implementation of color verification solutions allows for analysis of the historical data using a built-in trending module or exported data into an application such as Microsoft Excel.
By doing this over a period of time (we suggest a month), printers will be able to determine the normal variation of their proofing process. Not every proofing system has the same normal variation; nor do any two similar proofing systems have identical variation. Once the normal variation is known, reasonable and achievable tolerance levels for the proofing system can be built.
If the tolerance levels from the previous step of this process are not what is wanted, don’t be discouraged. We still have meaningful historical data which will allow us to make process improvements. Using this information allows us to dig into the database. For instance, we would be able to see that an inkjet proofing paper from a vendor has a delta E variation beyond what a printer is willing to accept over a month’s time. The key is that process changes will be made based upon objective fact and not subjective opinions.
The process changes made will continue to improve the ongoing process, which will result in fewer and fewer defective proofs. Each defective proof no longer being made has a cost savings associated with it. When you add up all these little cost savings, you can quickly calculate the return on investment of your hard copy, color proofing process control software solution. In our experience, the entire cost of the ProofPass system is recovered in less than one month in many cases.
by JimRaffel on August 27, 2010
Let’s start by breaking down the title of this post. “bright future” implies that past brand color management practices have not delivered desired outcomes – true. “Brand color” refers to the precise color the brand owner is expecting to be reproduced regardless of substrate, print process or geographic location. “Management” is the meat of this post, I will show how to manage the expectations of the brand owner, so as to under promise and over deliver on color reproductions expectations.
Existing categorization and naming systems have failed our industry and in fact created unmanageable brand owner expectations. Designers work with swatch books that may or may not be in good condition printed on a substrate that probably has no similarity to the substrate the printer will be asked to produce the work on. Worse yet, the designer calls up a “347 Red” in Photoshop and think it looks “just right” on their un-calibrated monitor. At some point downstream a printer will be asked to produce this completely unidentifiable color.
There’s a better way
Creation of a database produced on the correct substrate with ink for the desired printing process. In other words, a database of colors that are actually achievable on press. Creating a database of this magnitude is no small endeavor but it’s also no longer a pipe dream. With the support and sponsorship of a client just such a database is now a reality. It’s now easy for supply chain members to request a search of the database for an existing “real” color on the correct substrate with the correct ink.
The solution in a nut shell
A centralized database facilitates accurate communication throughout the supply chain. By utilizing internet technology the exact same color information is made available to brand owners, prepress vendors, printers and ink suppliers. Duplicates can be consolidated with search technologies, thus simplifying paperwork and job preparation. Such a system allows the brand owner to approve a color and then know that prepress vendors, ink suppliers and printers are all using the correct information. The ultimate goal of a centralized database is to provide the brand owner with piece of mind that the color information is being communicated correctly from design to finished product. In addition, ink savings are typically realized because fewer colors need to be maintained and there is less chance of the wrong ones making it to press with the entire supply chain looking at the same information.
While existing color measurement and verification tools “sort of” work there are problems. The lack of systems being able to use a single spectral reference value and then easily share color information (via API or applications programmers interface) back and forth diminishes the effectiveness. By utilizing cloud computing based systems these limitations can be overcome.
Please feel free to contact us for information on how we are delivering the future of brand color management today.
This was originally posted on JimRaffel.com on Jan. 9, 2007. It has been revised for this blog. You can view the original here.
ColorMetrix
Proofpass.com Renewal