Letters, feedback, get it off your chest: 31 May 2011
Bruce Peddlesden,On-Demand, stirred a hornet's nest when he criticised the notion of an ISO standard fro digital print. It went viral and drew responses from all around the world.
Alan Ferguson still haunts us.
re: Digital disputes standard differences … Print21 article
Your article was very interesting to read. Thank you. It is important for us in the ISO TC130 to understand how the printers (no matter of digital, flexo, offset) see the standards.
Looking at the big picture the idea is to reach the same colour with any of the methods by applying the right standard. The ISO TC130 WG3 is currently working on a revision of the 12647-2 as the 2004 version does not fit to the current needs anymore.
So the new standard revision takes more substrate classes into account but also the film-based standard requirements will disappear.
The topic with digital printing vs 12647-2 is not a very new one. We are also working on the new standard for digital printing (ISO 15311), which actually takes the needs of the digital printing into account.
Have you been in contact with fogra before?
Andy Kraushaar, the convenor of our ISO TC130 Workgroup 3 wrote an article last autumn about this topic with a proposal on a solution.
http://www.fogra.org/index.php?menuid=48&downloadid=222&reporeid=0
Last month the ISO TC 130 WG3 Experts from all around the globe met in
Berlin to discuss about the draft on the new standard (ISO 15311) and we made a good progress. The ultimate aim is to guarantee that whatever the digital printing method is, the customer can expect the same result.
The HP Indigo machine certainly gives a good print result. I fully believe that it can match the requirements of the 12647-2 standard. Its from its construction like a digital offset method. The result is very close.
I don't see any problem if Bruce certifies the Indigo for the ISO 12647-2 as long as he takes care to reach it on a constant base. Good for his customers.
The real strength of the digital is in the variable data printing (pictures
+ text). It should not be seen as a replacement for offset. It extends the range of possible products and if the standard 12647-2 takes care that both methods can combine print jobs (e.g. for catalogues in direct mail) it is even better.
The ISO 15311 does not disclassify the digital printing to a secondary quality, it is moreover a bridge to fill the gap where 12647-2 can not be applied. The ISO 12647-4 (rotogravure) for instance is also a very valid standard and not better or worse than ISO 12647-2. It is made to fit the needs of the gravure.
Fogra is searching for contributors to the digital printing round table.
The workgroup was very active during the last two years to discuss and define the needs for creating a true digital printing standard.
I am sure Andy Kraushaar will provide you with more information.
Best regards,
Gerd Carl
UPM
------------------------------
Thanks so much for the opportunity to respond to this piece. I sit on ISO TC130 (Graphics Technology) in WGs 2 (Data Exchange), 3 (Process Control & Related Metrology) and 11 (the Environmental Impact of Print) for which I am the convenor. I am close to the evolution of the 12647 series, 15311 which Mr Peddlesden references and 15339 which is a new standard relevant to this discussion.
But before we get into that, I absolutely agree with Mr Peddlesden. We write standards to be used and if he can make the tolerances in 12647-2 on a digital press more power to him! What machines does he use?
I don’t know who you’ve been talking to you, – the mysterious “they” – but there seems to be some misunderstanding here and this “corrosive divide” sounds perilous indeed. The 12647 series was established some fifteen years ago to provide “Process Control for the Production of Half-tone Colour Separations, Proofs and Prints”. Part 2 relates specifically to offset processes, but that doesn’t mean that its implementation: “should be reserved for offset printing”. The standard outlines the process parameters and its tolerance values were chosen to balance customer expectations (minimal colour variations), technical production limits and production costs. It’s wonderful that Mr Peddlesden digital presses can meet this standard. (If they are Indigo machines they are in fact offset engines;))
We are reviewing all of the standards in the 12647 series in an attempt to update them to reflect the digital reality of the modern printing industry. And this is tricky because as mentioned there are two new standards also under development. 15311- the Requirements for Printed Matter Utilising Digital Printing Technologies for the (sic) Commercial and Industrial Production is based on the idea of controlling factors influencing the visual characteristics of a page image, such as substrate, colorant and imaging process. I personally don’t hold out much hope for it and am far more enthusiastic about 15339.
15339 - Printing from Digital Data (so much more to the point), is a process agnostic standard that uses the idea of target colour values. It is based on the principle that electronic or digital data is the intermediary for content storage and exchange and is therefore its output has to be process independent. The print process decision is largely determined by run length and the substrates. I have great hopes for this standard because it has the scope to support all printing methodologies, and assumes that eventually digital output processes will have spread to all areas of the market.
The divide of which you speak is silly and should be bridged with accurate information. If this divide exists, it probably exists because of ignorance which is never good for the market and ultimately undermines the industry’s confidence. Many people chitchat about standards, pontificating as to their relevance or value, expressing their opinions, humble or otherwise, often forgetting to consider the facts. So Mr Peddlesden is completely right in his view and I am very pleased that he has taken the time, trouble and cost to be certified to 12647-2. TC130 is also working on a standard for certification, with which UGRA’s work will comply.
It is up to the market to decide if a standard is suitable for a particular use case or not. And a technology or process doesn’t have to be a standard for the market to embrace it: remember PostScript and PDF? The important thing to remember is that anything that helps printers produce better work for customers is a good thing. It really doesn’t matter if you think 12647-2 conformance should be confined to offset presses or not, but if you do you should try broadening your horizons. Far more important is that conformance matters to customers. They want assurance that a printer can conform to a process control standard that provides a form of output quality assurance. For the customer what press was used to do it should be irrelevant, and eventually will be.
Laurel Brunner
Managing Director
Digital Dots Limited
PS Please follow me on twitter.com: http://twitter.com/#search?q=laurelbrunner
… and check out my blog in the Features bit of Output Magazine http://www.outputmagazine.com/talk-print/
… to stay fully up to date with the industry SUBSCRIBE to Spindrift at www.digitaldots.org today!
---------------------------
Mr. Peddlesden,
I kindly invite you to actively participate in the WG3 activities where ISO 12647-2 has been created (and is currently being updated). Then you will see the substantiation behind it (to what is it applicable and why digital is not covered) and the background for creating an all new ISO 15311-x for digital printing.
But I do understand anyone by going the easy way (in contrast to actively contribute, discuss and evaluate concepts and metrics with national or international experts)
I am wondering what you report when we there will be a dedicated printing standard (including an index for mottling)
sincerely
Andy Kraushaar,
Fogra
-------------------------
Re: Reflections on the passing of Alan Ferguson - Steven Reichelt
I knew Alan when he was in Notting Hill. My family company Pacific Envelopes new him well & dealt with him over the years.
He was a lovely man & I’m shocked about his passing. This industry is very cruel & I can understand how low it can get, Pacific was around for 24 years but we went under 2 + years ago.
Your article speaks the truth
Thanks & take care
Stella Dempsey
Australian Envelopes
––––––––––––––––––
Re: Moore goes under after losing AAE $2m contract
Moore Australasia formally Moore business Systems has today announced that it has appointed administrators I mention this with great sadness and hope that the staff will not only find other positions but that they will get their entitlements as well. Moore was a Titanic looking for an iceberg for the past few months and I guess the treasure hunters will now pick up for a song the rest of the company like they did with Moore Western Australia.
Jacob Perkins