Michael,
"Technically speaking", so you proof GRACoL2013 (CRPC6)?
The reported White Point measurement of L: 94.03 a: -0.1 b: -1.01 is the work of the MInolta FD-9?
Got it!
Looking frward to your version of the Fiery RIP.
I bet you also have the Color Manager extension? Or PLug-in or Module, or wahatever they call it?
That's a few $$ add-on...
Now, the 1 million dollar question comes.
I know the numbers coming out of TC1617 proofing can be superlatively good.
Ultimately, the question is how good your customers are satisfied with the proof-to--final product?
And I'll bet they are, from all the good practices you integrate.
But, the Epson Proofing Standard 240 was (still is?) "certified" for GRACoL2006_C1 proofing, while ISO committees were still arguing for a measurement solution for optically brightened papers. Since 2006, IDEAlliance has adopted ISO-13655:2009 series of Mx measuring MOdes, including M0 (Legacy or UV-included), M1 (so-called D50) and M2 (UV-excluded) and M3 (Polarized) "filtering" which yiled different measurements according to the "severity" of the optical brightening of the paper.
So, GRACoL2006_C1 characterization data was "M0" because that's all there was a t the time.
But, to my very humble knowledge, GRACoL2013 is supposed to be "M1".
One of the question I have is what alternate substrate ought to be used for proofing GRACoL2013? Since the White Point has become a little more "b* negative"? I think it has gone from b* = -2.00 (2006) to b* = -4.00 (2013), in an effort to "aligne" with Fogra51, if I'm not mistaking, although I'm told the method by which the dataset has been arrived was not as the result of extensive press testing, as Fogra51 was.
I hate to have to pay for ORIS or GMG horrendously expensive GRACoL2013 "certified" proofing susbstrate but I'm curious to see how different the resulting colors are on these "true" M1 kind of media.
------------------------------
Roger Breton G7 Expert
Graxx Inc.
Laval QC
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-08-2019 01:25 PM
From: Michael Todryk
Subject: "Dedicated" non-ICC RIPs
The white point is from the FD-9. We check all of our measurement devices in Maxwell monthly for accuracy. We proof to GRACoL 2013 (CRPC6). Metrics were compared to that. I can check for sure on Monday what version of Fiery XF, but it's the latest one
______________________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, and any files/attachments transmitted, may include confidential and/or proprietary information from IWCO Direct, intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that disclosure, printing, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this electronic information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply message and then delete the electronic message and any files/attachments.
Original Message------
Michael,
Wow! This is excellent news!I
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
I hope you don't mind me further picking your brain....
The CIE Lab value for the Epson Proofing Standard 240 media you reported above, L: 94.03 a: -0.1 b: -1.01, is that with the Minolta FD-9 or with the Spectroproofer?
About the Metric from your last readings, is that comparing measurements of the TC1617, from the FD-9, presumably, to the GRACoL2006_C1 dataset directly?
Finally, I'm considering a Fiery RIP for my own work, to drive my lowly P-5000, would you know the version of your EFI Fiery RIP.?
------------------------------
Roger Breton G7 Expert
Graxx Inc.
Laval QC
------------------------------