Article prepared by C. Clint Bolte, C. Clint Bolte & Associates, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. For additional information please call 717-263-5768, fax 717-263-8945, or e-mail to clint@clintbolte.com.

GATF Technology Alert 2003

Differentiation Technologies

The tenth GATF Tech Alert Conference continued its legacy of offering the only printing forum in the world to present scientific comparison studies of leading technology offerings from competing manufacturers. Following each presentation panels comprised of early practitioners discuss their actual case study experiences. This year’s nearly 200 registrants saw and heard about the latest improvements in and practicalities of stochastic printing, newly formulated metallic & exotic inks, color management softwares, soft proofing, and the latest on digital printing.

None of these studies would be possible without the time, effort, and willingness of the manufacturers who cooperate in providing data that offer an apples-to-apples comparison with their competitors’ offerings. In a free enterprise environment this speaks volumes for these suppliers who see these GATF studies as advancing the state of the art for the benefit of the industry. When a particular study may suggest that their product needs improvement, most vendors do not hold back from further cooperation for short term sales reasons but rather use the study as the most credible third party means of highlighting areas or features needing improvement.

GATF’s scientific methodology will vary according to the study’s stated objectives and is continually improved based upon similar past studies. However, it normally involves GATF giving the manufacturers, who agree to participate, identical and always demanding digital files containing an array of test images as well as full spectrum graphic images. The suppliers run the digital files through their proprietary equipment sending GATF the results. GATF’s staff will then measure all submitted materials to arrive at quantifiable differences or variances. In many cases, such as proofs or digital printing, the submitted materials are compared against an actual controlled lithographic pressrun produced at the Graphic Arts Technical Foundation headquarters. In their efforts to thoroughly evaluate competing vendors, printers used to develop their own test images to be run by each vendor on the proposed piece of equipment. For at least the last ten years, smart printers all realize that GATF is doing the same thing much more thoroughly, comprehensively, less expensively, and quicker then they ever could by themselves.

GATF’s Tech Alert Conference is the forum designed to share these applied research comparison studies with the global graphic communications industry.

Keynoter Jim Mikol, Leo Burnett’s Director of Print Management, spoke on the changing use and technology of print in advertising. Leo Burnett is the giant advertising agency with 92 offices in 87 countries buying over $200 million of print. In summary “Quality by itself will not effect change, technology and change must create a value proposition, and change must equate to opportunity.”

Leo Burnett uses soft proofing for every printing job except where contract proofs are dictated. Stochastic screening is hot and must be used for all Leo Burnett catalogs containing textiles and patterns. The firm has been involved with digital printing for three years and has seen customized direct mail response rates climb from the old mass mailing days of 1-2% to consistently between 10-12% and some programs as high as 30%. This ten-fold improvement in prospect responses will drive further investment in the digital asset management linkage to customizable products.

Stochastic screening, sometimes called FM or frequency modulated screening, was identified as an impact technology at the very first Tech Alert ’94 Conference. Advancements in related technologies have improved stochastic operations and suggest the printing industry would benefit from a revisit to update the latest findings. Project leader and GATF Print Analyst Greg Radencic discussed the study methodology and findings. Seven different vendors participated by taking the furnished digital file, sending it through their proprietary stochastic software, outputting on their CTP units, and returning press-ready plates to be run on GATF’s Heidelberg SM 102 four-color press. Two vendors also added plates processed via their hybrid screening software as well.

The FM-generated print results were also compared with a second print run containing identical test images that were output computer-to-plate via conventional AM screening technology. All stochastic candidates predictably resolved the moiré test patterns, but this later comparison with AM printing was to quantify any other sacrifices in print characteristics. Solid ink densities were consistent between the AM and FM plates. The FM-generated images showed TVI (dot gain) about 10% more overall, about a 20% loss in shadow print contrast, gray balance characteristics were slightly different, and some opinions were expressed that the latest FM screening produced better flesh tones.

GATF Technical Consultant Bruce Teitz moderated a printer panel of six stochastic users. All were 100% CTP with one newsprint web printer standardized on a 35 micron dot size, a high end sheetfed printer (Phoenix’s Woods Litho) working with a 9 micron dot, and all other sheetfed printers staying at the 20 micron standard size. Three of the panelists use FM screening on their entire commercial work but most selectively apply it as subject matter dictates and as a problem-solving tool.

All panelists agreed that the only way to effectively deal with the increased tonal value (dot gain) attributed to stochastic is by (1) finger printing the press and (2) building custom curves to compensate the digital images. Craig Beedy, Sells Printing’s Vice President of Technology from New Berlin, Wisconsin, advises “a custom curve for every grade of stock.” Frank Woods, retired President of Woods Lithograph, added that they even have curves for select clients and the total quantity could well be 200-300 curves.

Cleanliness is so important for successful FM implementation Mr. Beedy remarked, “Film was a nightmare (due to difficulty in maintaining cleanliness in the plate frame.” CTP has offered the turn around for predictable consistency and overall improved print results. The keys to successful stochastic application were summarized by Jim Frisch, RR Donnelley’s CTP Staff Specialist as “fingerprinting (the presses), process control, (preventive) maintenance, and train the crews.”

Another technology whose time has arrived is soft proofing, which uses identical monitors at the printer and client locations. The client views and marks up his digital file on the monitor using IM (instant messaging) for the printer to correct. The old practice of marking up hard proofs are eliminated resulting in saving the expense of overnight couriers to schlep proofs and the time lost by the slow couriers in looking at iterative changes to a file.

GATF’s Julie Shaffer, the Director of GATF’s Center for Imaging Excellence, reviewed the features and capabilities of the five foremost soft proofing vendors. Each company has its own philosophy and approach for soft proof delivery and markup. Ms. Shaffer has data and knowledge of another six suppliers whose systems are coming on quickly. Any printer wanting to make the soft proofing decision could get a handsome ROI on their entire annual PIA/GATF dues in time saved by contacting Ms. Shaffer or Greg Bassinger for a copy of their presentation. If a major print-buying client is pressing his printer for a decision, both parties could hop a flight to Pittsburgh and spend half a day reviewing this exhaustive and timely study compiled by these two staff experts and quickly arrive at a mutually beneficial solution.

Mr. Bassinger, GATF’s Manager of Process Controls, looked at the state of the art for using soft proofing for contract color. He reviewed and compared the two leading vendors’ products and then creatively put together off-the-shelf monitors and software as a “home grown” system to see how closely he could emulate the capability of the “packaged” offerings. The study involved three facets: (1) a comparison of the two matching monitors, (2) a comparison of the monitor to the actual press sheet, and (3) a professional visual judgment survey assessment. Over three dozen “color experts,” i.e., their job is to judge color critically, from around Pittsburgh as well as attendees at the conference compared visually the images on each vendor’s monitor device with the printed sheet produced to GRACoL standards for each graphics image.

The conclusions were surprising to some but clearly convincing to most. The monitor-to-monitor results were extremely close. The technology is here and practical! However, the homegrown alternative was noticeably inferior to both of the commercial offerings. This later alternative should not be considered a failure. It simply showed that printers, who want to put together their own soft proofing solutions, could do so but may not be able to achieve the level of consistent quality offered currently by the fully packaged vendors.

There is no current method available for reading and calculating the differences between emitted and reflective colors, which would be required for a monitor-to-press sheet comparison. The primary reason is that the press color gamut exceeds the monitor color gamut. This simply means that visual acumen is the best judge.

When asked if the monitor image satisfied the contract predictor of the press sheet for the four different images, a resounding YES vote was cast by at least half of the 31 color experts. On one image 85% of the experts accepted the monitor as representing a “contract quality” image. These experts voiced this range of opinions; “huge impact in the future…closer than expected…big improvement!”

A printer panel discussed their experiences with soft proofing. The Vice President for Operations of New York City’s Color by Pergament, Tom Vetter said, “Thirty percent of our proofs are now soft and have completely replaced hard proofs.” Most of the panelists treat the cost of soft proofs as a value-added service and do not charge additionally for this service. Jim Smiddy, Blanks Color Imaging’s Technology Director (Dallas, TX) added that soft proofing has increased their prepress revenues in three ways; (1) clients zoom in closer on the proofing monitor seeing additional things they want changed, (2) the monitor allows us to go through more correction iteration cycles than were ever possible before, and (3) the mark-up annotations are saved (as print outs) in the job jacket, which provides documentation for collecting more AAs than ever before. Mr. Vetter concluded that soft proofing does not work for all clients and said, “The client must want to be involved with the technology.”

Four years ago GATF did an exhaustive comparison of digital press offerings. This study was repeated for this conference with nine different process color machines from eight suppliers participating. The technology has improved and the results were outstanding. Again if a printer is considering buying his first digital press/copier, he would save so much time and angst by getting a copy of this valuable GATF study or go to Pittsburgh, interview GATF’s Director of Research John Lind, who was the project manager on this study, and view the compiled print gallery.

A few highlights from the digital print presentation; (1) caliper determines the ultimate speed of the machines with thicker substrates running slower, (2) rub resistance is better than offset, (3) run consistency is greater than or equal to offset, (4) the greater overprint trapping by some digital systems means higher color gamut than offset, and (5) digital color primaries could be closer to ISO offset standards, which would enhance their value as a co-sell with offset.

GATF’s Senior Technical Consultant Ray Prince moderated a panel discussing printing with metallic and exotic inks. The objectives of using these inks are to provide further differentiation from other printers, capability to offer security printing, and simply add unmatched richness to the printed job. Jorg Mannig, Ekhart-America’s Technical Director (Painesville, Ohio), offered several manufacturing trends; (1) new milling technologies result in particle size reduction and improved consistency, (2) novel surface chemistry show a mirror-like effect for better light reflection, (3) comprehensive product offerings for all major applications are offered, and (4) the suppliers are moving from raw material supplier to partner implementing new effects and applications. This last point is important as Mr. Prince mentioned that he got 20 refusals from printers that he invited to participate on this panel. They apparently don’t want to share their secrets of how to print with these inks.

GATF’s Greg Bassinger led another panel discussion of color management practitioners. Priority Litho’s (Maryland Heights, Missouri) Production Manager Rich Apollo said his firm’s adoption of color management practices coincided with their transition to CTP in 2000, when the ICC profiles had to be built on all presses to accommodate the sharpening characteristics of CTP. He added that a constructive dialogue is now established between electronic prepress and the pressroom. Eric Ferguson, VERTIS’ (Irving, Texas) Color Engineer, commented that there is more objective communication with all parties now. Huhtamaki’s (Desoto, Kansas) Color Technician, Craig Schuning remarked, “Press operators’ confidence levels are up.” He added that color management makes EPP’s job so much easier except that now the pressroom wants legacy files to be redone with LAB color space so that they are consistent with all other ICC workflow! The panelists all concurred that their investment in hardware, software, employee training, and a dedicated consultant was less than $30,000 per plant.

The single most far-reaching and potentially valuable publication produced year in and year out for the printing industry is GATF’s Technology Forecast, edited by Deanna Gentile. Print executives from every size firm throughout the world would be much more effective strategic planners if they read this 98-page jewel as essential background information. One of the industry’s superb technologists, Ray Prince, and a leading edge practitioner of his choice reviewed highlights from the 65 articles written by 61 authors for the attendees. This year his counter part was Vicki Stone, highly respected, former GATF staffer and current Director of Prepress Operations for Lexington, North Carolina’s Green Printing and Packaging.

There were a couple of firsts at this tenth Tech Alert that hopefully will benefit the industry and increase future attendance. Those that flew into Pittsburgh walked a hundred yards to the airport Hyatt, which made their logistics, i.e., no cabs, so much easier. For the first time an Executive of PIA, in this case their new CEO Michael Makin, attended the conference and got a flavor for the breadth and depth of applied research that GATF can bring to the industry. PIA’s success at marketing and merchandising of these invaluable GATF services throughout the industry has fallen far short of its promise since the merger of these two organizations. Hopefully more appropriate attention and resources will be directed toward that objective now that the boss is personally in the loop. Mr. Makin’s expressed enthusiasm was certainly well received by both the 26 supplier sponsors as well as attendees, who had personal conversations with him.

Article prepared by C. Clint Bolte, C. Clint Bolte & Associates, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. For additional information please call 717-263-5768, fax 717-263-8945, or e-mail to clint@clintbolte.com.