RIP Software / ICC Input Profiles

[x2chris7x]

We recently hard some maintenance done on our printer (VJ-1614) and after some new parts and updating the printer's firmware we needed to make some adjustments to some of our profiles... In doing so we noticed a few things that we've been changing and making test prints to see what looks best. So I'm wopndering what most people have their ICC Input profiles set to within their RIP Software? (we are using Wasatch).

Our vector profiles are set to relative colormetric (Proof) for CMYK and RGB, and our raster profiles are set to perceptual (Pretty). We seem to get more vibrant prints when using perceptual for all profiles, and it even helped with those funky boxes that appear around raster objects with transparency that are embedded in vector files...

So what are ya'll using? Relative? Perceptual? or a combination of both?

 

[DIGIXTRA]

First thing first.. Do you have equipment & software to make your own profile? Playing with canned profile is just luck and not correct..
Normally a perceptual rendering won't give you vibrant color. It gives you smooth gradation/ transition . In your case it could be the input profile has smaller color gamut than the output profile.
Relative color for vector is OK because it mean to reproduce the color accuracy but you could run into posterization where the out of gammut color is.
My 2cents.

 

[DIGIXTRA]

Oh forgot to answer your question... I play safe so I just set Perceptual for both.

 

[rfulford]

Your application settings and your input profiles should match. My RIP settings are below (not Wasatch)

Adobe RGB Perceptual
US Web Coated Swop Perceptual

Use embedded profiles checked.

 

[x2chris7x]

Relative color for vector is OK because it mean to reproduce the color accuracy but you could run into posterization where the out of gammut color is.
My 2cents.

I read earlier that Relative should give an more accurate reproduction but after doing some test prints... I noticed pantone colors printed with relative color set look washed out, but after changing to perceptual they are more vibrant and are almost an exact match to the swatches in our pantone book.

And yes we have the ability to create our own profiles, we have just been altering the profiles that were setup years ago b/c they aren't working correctly with the new parts/firmware that have been updated on our printer... We have already gone in to change the ink limits

 

[x2chris7x]

Your application settings and your input profiles should match. My RIP settings are below (not Wasatch)

Adobe RGB Perceptual
US Web Coated Swop Perceptual

Use embedded profiles checked.

I thought they may need to match... My color space in set to SWOP for CMYK and Adobe RGB, but it the RIP it is set to sRGB, CMYK is the same. I tried changing to Adobe RGB in the RIP but it is not available. Do you think I should set my color space to match the sRGB instead? This probably doesn't affect our prints much because 99% of our files are CMYK

 

[DIGIXTRA]

I read earlier that Relative should give an more accurate reproduction but after doing some test prints... I noticed pantone colors printed with relative color set look washed out, but after changing to perceptual they are more vibrant and are almost an exact match to the swatches in our pantone book.

And yes we have the ability to create our own profiles, we have just been altering the profiles that were setup years ago b/c they aren't working correctly with the new parts/firmware that have been updated on our printer... We have already gone in to change the ink limits

Be aware... Pantone is entierly different animal... Did the color you print out with Relative color setting match the CMYK version of Pantone or the true Pantone itself?. Remember all Pantone eventualy be converted to CMYK.

 

[DIGIXTRA]

I thought they may need to match... My color space in set to SWOP for CMYK and Adobe RGB, but it the RIP it is set to sRGB, CMYK is the same. I tried changing to Adobe RGB in the RIP but it is not available. Do you think I should set my color space to match the sRGB instead? This probably doesn't affect our prints much because 99% of our files are CMYK

As was my suspect...your input profile (Adobe RGB) is different from the Rip set up (sRGB) which give you the effect of brilant color. In Wasatch you can change to any profile you want.. Just copy the needed ICC from the Adobe Photoshop folder to the Inputprofile folder of Wasatch and point to it when asked.

 

[x2chris7x]

Be aware... Pantone is entierly different animal... Did the color you print out with Relative color setting match the CMYK version of Pantone or the true Pantone itself?. Remember all Pantone eventualy be converted to CMYK.

Relative match? No. Set to perceptual the color matches the CMYK version of the pantone... Looking at the pantone book (Color Bridge/coated) it matches the CMYK swatches in the right hand column

 

[x2chris7x]

As was my suspect...your input profile (Adobe RGB) is different from the Rip set up (sRGB) which give you the effect of brilant color. In Wasatch you can change to any profile you want.. Just copy the needed ICC from the Adobe Photoshop folder to the Inputprofile folder of Wasatch and point to it when asked.

Only thing is I haven't printed any files in RGB... All testing has been done with CMYK files both raster and vector. This is where you notice the diffference. Printing a vector file (.eps) set to CMYK and printing the same exact file flattened as a raster (.tif) give different results. Raster file is more vibrant, pantone colors are a closer match...

After changing the ICC Input Profile for "CMYK Vector" in the RIP to perceptual the raster and vector files print almost identically, where as when the CMYK Vector profile was set to relative colormetric the colors were washed out when compared to the raster version of the same image.

 

[b6hs]

Only thing is I haven't printed any files in RGB... All testing has been done with CMYK files both raster and vector. This is where you notice the diffference. Printing a vector file (.eps) set to CMYK and printing the same exact file flattened as a raster (.tif) give different results. Raster file is more vibrant, pantone colors are a closer match...

After changing the ICC Input Profile for "CMYK Vector" in the RIP to perceptual the raster and vector files print almost identically, where as when the CMYK Vector profile was set to relative colormetric the colors were washed out when compared to the raster version of the same image.

We also use Wasatch since 2 years. But im still looking for the perfect rendering print parameters..
If someone have it..
Using Hexis v200/300/ h2 media ..
Do you take notice of the icc input profile?

 

[x2chris7x]

We also use Wasatch since 2 years. But im still looking for the perfect rendering print parameters..
If someone have it..
Using Hexis v200/300/ h2 media ..
Do you take notice of the icc input profile?

Sorry, we print on Oracal 3165 Vinyl and Ultraflex Banner...

 

[DIGIXTRA]

Only thing is I haven't printed any files in RGB... All testing has been done with CMYK files both raster and vector. This is where you notice the diffference. Printing a vector file (.eps) set to CMYK and printing the same exact file flattened as a raster (.tif) give different results. Raster file is more vibrant, pantone colors are a closer match...

After changing the ICC Input Profile for "CMYK Vector" in the RIP to perceptual the raster and vector files print almost identically, where as when the CMYK Vector profile was set to relative colormetric the colors were washed out when compared to the raster version of the same image.

Sorry to say but I think you are still not clear on the concept of color management:
a/ EPS is just an encapsulated postscript file... It is like an envelope where you can put mixed CMYK and RGB files in it. Before you seal the envelope you have many options such as: Leave the content AS IS ...meaning do not convert the ICC of the files in the envelope and let the RIP do the "conversion". Doing this way you have to make sure your CMYK and RGB file match with the Input ICC of the Wasatch.
b/ Convert to CMYK or RGB ...etc when saving EPS. Doing this way you ask the layout software (Indesign) to do the conversion first then send everything as a package of either CMYK or RGB but not both. Again you have to make sure that your ICC setup match with Input profile of Wasatch

To test your setup ..use Indesign and imbed 2 Tiff files of the same image. One is RGB(1988) and the other is CMYK (SWOP). Save the file as EPS as methods above and print them out. Both image (RGB & CMYK) should look identical or else your setup is wrong somewhere (mismatch ICC)..

Hope this could help..

 

[neil_se]

We print mainly vector graphics and only a very small percentage of photos, so I've got both set to relative colorimetric to avoid transparency issues.

 

[x2chris7x]

Sorry to say but I think you are still not clear on the concept of color management:
a/ EPS is just an encapsulated postscript file... It is like an envelope where you can put mixed CMYK and RGB files in it. Before you seal the envelope you have many options such as: Leave the content AS IS ...meaning do not convert the ICC of the files in the envelope and let the RIP do the "conversion". Doing this way you have to make sure your CMYK and RGB file match with the Input ICC of the Wasatch.
b/ Convert to CMYK or RGB ...etc when saving EPS. Doing this way you ask the layout software (Indesign) to do the conversion first then send everything as a package of either CMYK or RGB but not both. Again you have to make sure that your ICC setup match with Input profile of Wasatch

To test your setup ..use Indesign and imbed 2 Tiff files of the same image. One is RGB(1988) and the other is CMYK (SWOP). Save the file as EPS as methods above and print them out. Both image (RGB & CMYK) should look identical or else your setup is wrong somewhere (mismatch ICC)..

Hope this could help..

Thanks for all your info, but I don think we're on the same page... 1st within Wasatch there are 4 instances to which these Input Profiles are selected 1. RGB Vector 2. RGB Raster 3. CMYK Vector 4. CMYK Raster. The proper profile is selected within Wasatch based on the color mode of the file and the information contained in the file...

You may not believe this but, I created a file within Illustrator which had 2 embedded .tif's (raster) that also had transparent backgrounds, everything else was vector art the file was saved as an .eps with the U.S. Coated (SWOP) profile embedded. Sent to printer... All vector portions of the image are lighter and washed out, but the 2 .tif's were darker and more vibrant. I then took the same .eps file, opened in photoshop and saved as a flattened .tif with the U.S. Coated (SWOP) profile embedded. Sent to printer... Now all portions of the artwork printed darker and more vibrant (everything in this print matches the area of the 2 embedded .tif's in the first print) This only makes me think that Wasatch sees the .eps and determines which portions are vector and which are raster and interprets them differently (depending on which Input profiles are selected)

I then printed the same exact file as the first print with embedded tif's, and with the U.S. Coated (SWOP) profile embedded. This time I changed the Input Profile within Wastach to Perceptual for both Vector and Raster CMYK files. When printed it looks identical to the flattened tif (2nd print) that was darker and more vibrant.

I'm not really asking about the profile itself "U.S. Coated (SWOP)" or "Adobe RGB"... I'm asking about the rending of these profiles after they have been selected.

 

[DIGIXTRA]

Thanks for all your info, but I don think we're on the same page... 1st within Wasatch there are 4 instances to which these Input Profiles are selected 1. RGB Vector 2. RGB Raster 3. CMYK Vector 4. CMYK Raster. The proper profile is selected within Wasatch based on the color mode of the file and the information contained in the file...

You may not believe this but, I created a file within Illustrator which had 2 embedded .tif's (raster) that also had transparent backgrounds, everything else was vector art the file was saved as an .eps with the U.S. Coated (SWOP) profile embedded. Sent to printer... All vector portions of the image are lighter and washed out, but the 2 .tif's were darker and more vibrant. I then took the same .eps file, opened in photoshop and saved as a flattened .tif with the U.S. Coated (SWOP) profile embedded. Sent to printer... Now all portions of the artwork printed darker and more vibrant (everything in this print matches the area of the 2 embedded .tif's in the first print) This only makes me think that Wasatch sees the .eps and determines which portions are vector and which are raster and interprets them differently (depending on which Input profiles are selected)

I then printed the same exact file as the first print with embedded tif's, and with the U.S. Coated (SWOP) profile embedded. This time I changed the Input Profile within Wastach to Perceptual for both Vector and Raster CMYK files. When printed it looks identical to the flattened tif (2nd print) that was darker and more vibrant.

I'm not really asking about the profile itself "U.S. Coated (SWOP)" or "Adobe RGB"... I'm asking about the rending of these profiles after they have been selected.

I may not answer your question directly because your are not using ICC correctly at the root.( Please read again using Google)... Rendering Intent will not change any color as long as it it within the printer gammut. Rendering Intent is a way to map the out-of-gammut color to within the given gammut- that's it. If you have the print that print out darker or lighter.. then 99% it is because you are not using correct ICC for input & output. So start looking for your problem from there.

 

[x2chris7x]

I may not answer your question directly because your are not using ICC correctly at the root.( Please read again using Google)... Rendering Intent will not change any color as long as it it within the printer gammut. Rendering Intent is a way to map the out-of-gammut color to within the given gammut- that's it. If you have the print that print out darker or lighter.. then 99% it is because you are not using correct ICC for input & output. So start looking for your problem from there.

Ok... Whatever u say buddy. U can think what u want, but I have changed settings and performed test prints... These are facts. My profiles match and, there is no "problem" that I'm trying to fix... By changing the rendering intent it increased the overall quality of my prints, I've seen it... Have u changed these setting and performed test prints? Probably not... So you should do that before you start adding your 2 cents. All I originally wanted to know was if u used perceptual, relative color, or a combination... And uve already answered that question, so thanks

 

[b6hs]

Ok... Whatever u say buddy. U can think what u want, but I have changed settings and performed test prints... These are facts. My profiles match and, there is no "problem" that I'm trying to fix... By changing the rendering intent it increased the overall quality of my prints, I've seen it... Have u changed these setting and performed test prints? Probably not... So you should do that before you start adding your 2 cents. All I originally wanted to know was if u used perceptual, relative color, or a combination... And uve already answered that question, so thanks

I also do a lot of test print so as to increase the overall quality of my prints
here is my config but colors don't really match i use iso coated v2 300ECI icc profil as input and this one in output , should i do anything different? when i get around the profil the color look better

 

[b6hs]

I may not answer your question directly because your are not using ICC correctly at the root.( Please read again using Google)... Rendering Intent will not change any color as long as it it within the printer gammut. Rendering Intent is a way to map the out-of-gammut color to within the given gammut- that's it. If you have the print that print out darker or lighter.. then 99% it is because you are not using correct ICC for input & output. So start looking for your problem from there.

CAN you explain without google ?