Drag and Drop Browser Seps

[DDSol]

Yes, I think it'll be Awesome. I like Awesomeness, maybe you noticed .

So, what do you think about the advocates of the "learn to do it yourself and then use a software to help you" sep system?

Honestly, I don't think it holds water. I just read this thing by Scott Siebel, and he admits he resisted using computers, even saying he hated them. It's never easy to change what we're used to and comfortable with. But in the end resistance is futile and change is the only constant. To fight the current is not just useless, but a waste of energy.

I mean, how many people drive a car compared to how many are able to understand how it works, let alone how many actually build their own? Understanding how these seps come about would only be useful if at some point you were cut off from the resource you rely on to get it done. But this goes as well for baking bread. What if stores stopped selling it? Can you bake a loaf? We all rely on each other in so many ways. Does any screen printer carve their own squeegee from a tree they grew in their backyard? The answer is no. The truth is that if you can sep in 30 seconds for a reasonable fee, you're better off doing that than to spend many hours doing it yourself. It's more cost effective, and specialization on both your part (making graphics) and the part of the sepper allow a higher quality product for a lower price. Henry Ford was one of the pioneers in this area. Each person on the line did 1 thing and did it very well.

This doesn't mean learning is a bad thing. Knowing how to do something is good. But shallow knowledge in a large number of areas is not as valuable as highly specialized knowledge in one area. You may offer something not easily found anywhere, which increases the value enormously (very low supply, moderate demand). However, with specialization comes the risk of extinction. By relying on 1 thing you put all your eggs in 1 basket. This basket may be a goldmine today, but may be wiped out completely tomorrow by a small change in the environment. Such it may be for the pro-seppers who make good money today by specializing in this one area. A product like mine could seriously threaten their way of life. I can understand the level of apprehension they may have.

Unfortunately, I too have to make a living. And also, if it isn't me today, then it'll be someone else tomorrow. Change is as inevitable for me as it is for anyone else. It used to be hard to find a web designer, for instance, but these days, with powerful tools and lots of competition, it's easy to get a web site up in as little as an hour, or a day or 2 if you want custom graphics. And not just that, it costs a fraction of what it used to cost. So those who have invested in being a web designer are now shorted on their returns.

The market tends to be an equalizer here. The free market economy does not allow you to charge a lot, because since it means there's money to be made in what you do, it attracts competition, and this increases supply, which drives down the price.

However, starting your learning early and being demanding of your knowledge and skill allows you to have an advantage over any newcomers working from a sweatshop oversees: You provide what they can't: experience.

That said, I built a system which does such an awesome job at sepping that even highly seasoned pro-seppers will have a very hard time topping it. It's all about using the math. You cannot argue with math. Math will win every time. 2+2=4 and who can argue that?

The real way to make money is to simply provide value. Value is valuable. Whatever that means is for you to find out, because the more you have to rely on your own insights, the more unique they will be. And uniqueness is priceless. There are businesses that charge a lot more simply on the perception of being valuable. Take for example store brands: They often come from the exact same factory as the name brands, but the name brands are a lot more expensive. It's just a trick: The consumer thinks they get a better product, because it costs more. Who, then, are the sellers to not give you the opportunity to spend more money with them? No, they'll gladly give you the opportunity to empty your wallet into their cash registers.

I think it's important to think in terms of possibility rather than status-quo. Change is inevitable. Embracing it pays off big time. As a matter of fact, you'll be the forerunner, the leader of the pack, the guru in your field and America's Most Wanted (in a good way ). You're either a leader or a follower. Follow at your own peril. Don't go by the book, write your own. (And have others read it!)

Maybe that's a bit much information . But it seems people like to know how to get to where they're going, and I have some knowledge which begs to be shared. Maybe it's a little lost in this thread, lol . Nonetheless, there it is...

[Texas Slick]

Howdy, DSol
What is the link for the newest one?

[Dottonedan]

Jumping to my point, Im in. In a sep guy, but most all sep guys are artist as well, so I always have something to fall back on. Even on the art end, that's changing as well. Your right. Change is going to happen. I'm accustom to change.  Your either with it or agin it,  I'm with it.

Still tho, I say to you this. Math is indeed match. You can answer the 2+2 math question. My serious question is this.  Do (you) know how to do math or do you know how to do good seps?

The reason I ask, is because there are a portion of the business of seps that match an handle all on its own. The other portion is the % if jobs that relies on the ever moving math number.  (Eg). 2+2 is 4 on the surface, but your 2 shifts to 2.3, 3.75, etc, that 2 stays a 2 only in a confined equation. In printing, the 2 represents many changing things. A 6 color job in math only works one way. So while your math stays correct, your fixed program using math stays the same.

So your challenge is not just the math that you can handle, but to handle the separation variables like a human.  Can you give it AI or artificial intelligence to "adjust to the confines of a particular situation, Do "you" know how to separate at a professional level?

That's not a dis. It's just a helpful question. I have read that you do color seps, but how much is your experience at accommodating all scenarios?  For example, I know nothing about programming but pretty good at seps, yet I'm not perfect. Discharge for example is fairly to for me to accomadate my process to. The procedure changes (per job).  So I find it very challenging for you to be able to create something to accommodate or "change" based on the job. Now I know you can put in a feature for every scenario you can come up with (within what you know about).
That has its limits for everyone. So in the end, you are relying on the customer to punch in all if the parameters for your program to do its job, that is great, providing they know what to look for as well.

My thoughts are, that while you may create an awesome or near perfect program, it relies on other people to tell it what to do or to put in the right math questions do that it can answer.

Just some thoughts.

[DDSol]

@Texas, the link is now:
http://my.screenseps.com/seps.html

[DDSol]

@Dan:

Hey Dan, awesome notes there. Of course you're right. But that's a very isolated view, where my program is on trial and we can't compare this to an actual human sepper.

For instance, does the customer punch in this data when when they email you for a sep? What they tell you, you can use, what they don't you can't. You can prescribe to them how to do it, but so can I.

Here's the truth... Seppers, from beginner (just watched a Youtube how-to) to turbo pro, they all make mistakes. Big ones, starting with the fact that the math cannot add up. Pro seppers just make smaller mistakes. These mistakes, however, are still big enough to overshadow the more nitty gritty issues like how thick the emulsion is. The more you do it, the better you get, but you can never achieve perfection, because the method itself guarantees error with mathematical precision.

I think it's important to recognize that the major bulk of the sep job is the actual sepping. The other stuff, well, some angles... a bit of dot gain maybe. There's material available on sepping, and they're all pretty much the same: Use the selection tool to "pull colors" and then play with the tone curve until it looks good on press. That in itself is a big red flag. How many screen burns does that require? Too much fuzziness in this process.

Therefore, I've come to believe (and I may be wronger than wrong, we'll see) that the other stuff is not quite as relevant. Mesh count... meh. Too dense and you can't push ink, too small and dots go down the drain. Angle? Fugly moire. Well, that's about it. The rest is a lot of nitpicking. So much so that (as far as I know) nobody actually does anything with this information. It may be the other way around, that the info is controlled by the sep, so that it is a prescription of how to print. That your screens are precoated with 2 coats is irrelevant to the sepper. The sepper says, "coat with one coat" and that's what they have to do.

As far as AI: I have the next best thing, which is smart ink selection (which still makes mistakes right now) and instant preview. You see what it does immediately and you can adjust your inks as needed.

One area I'm still looking to improve is something a pro sepper may do that I can't as of yet, and this is image segmentation. A pro may select out a certain area and sep it separately. This may prevent pollution of colors, say in a text fading from red to black. You may not want the closest color match at all times. My program may toss in an unfortunate dash of blue, because your red isn't actually red, it just looks pretty red. If you could select the area, then you could delete inks you don't want used there.

In the future, I'll likely add this feature, but it's a heavy feature. When I have it, though, a pro sepper may not be able to top it at all.

Then there's such things like glitter and puff... unfortunately, I can't sep that, because it's not a color. You can of course substitute colors with specialty inks on press. But think about it: You can't visualize these inks in any program today. It's not like Corel has a special "Puff" color that shows up as puff on screen.

I may fix this issue as well, by allowing multiple images to be uploaded, where the extra channels are specialty inks. But it's then only for visualization, because the sepping is already done (it's in its own channel already). But then again, there's nothing to sep about it.

Today I do not support discharge, but that should be trivial to add, once I have time to do measurements and tests.

All in all, the fact that you can use whatever ink colors you like is the ability to change based on the job. No other software does that. There will be sliders, settings, nitty gritty stuff, but the major change, job-to-job, is which colors to print with and how many of them (high end (quality), low end (price) or 4 color press). I fully support high end jobs with many inks. Blending is sublime.

I want to keep the features down to a minimum. Ease of use is very important. It finds the colors for you. The most expensive software today doesn't care about the image you load in it. It will sep to the same 9 colors every damn time. Mine looks first. Things that don't matter shouldn't be in my software, or, if required by some percentage, should be deeply hidden on some "advanced" tab.

I rely on the customer to decide what looks good and what they can afford to print. I think that's not too much to ask. The price will be very decent. The ease is incredible. The prints will be totally awesome. Where's the catch?

Besides, Joe Printer can't afford a pro anyway. He's got his own family to feed. He doesn't have the resources to feed their family as well. Joe will be very happy. He will crank out shirts that were way out of reach. Someday soon he'll have enough high end clients on his 6 color rig to pay for 2 families. He'll hire someone and feed their family as well.

Joe Printer may be able to compete with the Big Dogs on quality because it has become viable to do so.

And that has nothing to do with nitty gritty "it's not a human" considerations. Joe is a human. He'll decide what colors to use. Joe will be the pro-sepper and my program will be his tool-of-the-trade. The learning curve is... well, it's more like a hump. Joe can handle that. He doesn't waste massive mounts of time a) Learning it and b) Doing it for each job.

So, yes, pro-seppers with their small-world, highly specialized domain knowledge will have their place in the future as well. It's for the scaredy cats and those unwilling to take on the responsibility of the outcome of a job themselves. Those who believe the fallacy, thinking that paying more will lead to higher quality. Measurable benefits? Who knows. Maybe we can measure it, but probably not. There's a huge benefit to using a pro-sepper here, however. It's the peace of mind. It's the same reason people have others do their taxes, or use a lawyer to apply for disability. It's to soothe the fear of the unknown. Billions are made every year just on that very concept. It's a real benefit to the consumer/customer.

I think this plays a big role even today in the sep industry. It may be hard to sep, but not as in complicated... more as in time consuming. A random YouTube on sepping teaches you how to do it. You run a few tries and before you know it, you're close to the pros, because you do what the pros do. But the YouTube looks daunting. That the dude makes it sound easy doesn't help, because you have questions like "How much do I select? Explain please!" and you end up thinking "It's not possible for me to 'get' this" and go to a pro with a Big Ole Sigh of Relief.

And note that this has nothing to do with the quality of the output of my sofftware or some pro. It's possible for a pro to say "Screen printing means trading off. The seps I got you are very good. I have 20 years experience. You won't get anything better anywhere. It's top of the line". The screen printer will then a) Be extremely happy with the result, even if the color is wrong or b) Blame himself for botching up the art of the master. In either case, the 20 years proves the pro is blameless.

My software won't have this luxury. If it produces crap, even if it IS the screen printer botching it, it will be because that piece-of-crap-good-for-nothing software that isn't a pro sepper. In other words, I had better get it right.

A note on "A 6 color job in math only works one way": This is actually not true. 6 colors in a 3D color space, where colors are linearly mixed between x colors, where x can be 1 or more, is over defined. What that means in mathelonian is that you can mix many colors in multiple ways perfectly accurately. A very large part of my secret sauce is the component that works out, for all colors, which colors to use to mix them. A gray, for instance, can be mixed 50% white, 50% black. However, it can also be mixed from 50% yellow and 50% blue. And if there's a gray ink, we should use 100% of that. These decisions are made by the engine generator, which generates a sep machine specifically for this set.

Considering that, about overdefined color spaces... I may just put in some interactivity to change how colors are mixed. Note that it took me years to figure out this way of deciding. It's very complex to change it. So, if the user wants his gray mixed from yellow and blue because it looks vibrant or whatever (look into Van Gogh and pointillism), and my program uses black and white... as of now, you can't do that, even though it would be perfectly valid.

So, it's a long road to perfection. Can anyone get there? But was anyone out there actually hoping they could mix their gray with a blue and a yellow? No! So if there's no problem, then why solve it? 99.9% of screen printers don't even know it can be done, and moreover, they may deny violently that it's even possible and a stupid way to go about making shirts. And yet, my monitor doesn't have any gray illumination elements. Red, green and blue... that's it, and yet, it looks pretty gray to me.

And there's so much more! But this post is already so damn long, so I have to just let it go and make my peace with the inconsistent nature of the universe...

[AdvancedArtist]

Jumping to my point, Im in. In a sep guy, but most all sep guys are artist as well, so I always have something to fall back on. Even on the art end, that's changing as well. Your right. Change is going to happen. I'm accustom to change.  Your either with it or agin it,  I'm with it.

Still tho, I say to you this. Math is indeed match. You can answer the 2+2 math question. My serious question is this.  Do (you) know how to do math or do you know how to do good seps?

The reason I ask, is because there are a portion of the business of seps that match an handle all on its own. The other portion is the % if jobs that relies on the ever moving math number.  (Eg). 2+2 is 4 on the surface, but your 2 shifts to 2.3, 3.75, etc, that 2 stays a 2 only in a confined equation. In printing, the 2 represents many changing things. A 6 color job in math only works one way. So while your math stays correct, your fixed program using math stays the same.

So your challenge is not just the math that you can handle, but to handle the separation variables like a human.  Can you give it AI or artificial intelligence to "adjust to the confines of a particular situation, Do "you" know how to separate at a professional level?

That's not a dis. It's just a helpful question. I have read that you do color seps, but how much is your experience at accommodating all scenarios?  For example, I know nothing about programming but pretty good at seps, yet I'm not perfect. Discharge for example is fairly to for me to accomadate my process to. The procedure changes (per job).  So I find it very challenging for you to be able to create something to accommodate or "change" based on the job. Now I know you can put in a feature for every scenario you can come up with (within what you know about).
That has its limits for everyone. So in the end, you are relying on the customer to punch in all if the parameters for your program to do its job, that is great, providing they know what to look for as well.

My thoughts are, that while you may create an awesome or near perfect program, it relies on other people to tell it what to do or to put in the right math questions do that it can answer.

Just some thoughts.

Have to be honest here... And having to come to understand even far more in the last several weeks. The human eye or thinking is irrelevant in the digital color space the math is the math there is no way around that. We can make judgement calls based on color and pop desires but digitally speaking, well you know. I mean common we all believed these seps could only be done with this special process for so many years when in reality we were all wrong all along. I even loaded a copy of CorelDRAW 8 a 16 year old version of the program on my system and did perfect HSB seps in less than 5 minutes. I could have done the same seps in the Industry Standard PS simulated process method in hours as I did so many times. Color adjustments and art tweaking are NOT color separating. Obviously file/art preparation work is often required as with any form of printing but preping is not separating.

I have had the privilege of consulting with some patent holding color scientist in the last several weeks and they all would agree with my statements here.

[Dottonedan]

 

colors in a 3D color space, where colors are linearly mixed between x colors, where x can be 1 or more, is over defined. What that means in mathelonian is that you can mix many colors in multiple ways perfectly accurately

Yes, (you) and the program can, by having a printer print them perfectly with Rutland inks on a garment may be different than what is calculated. I'm hoping its all true or all works as you plan.


The part of mixing a blue, a % of yellow and white with black, to get a gray, is indeed being done already. Its a part of my normal process and its not new. I expect that other seppers would do this as well. I have tho, seen some printers raise an eyebrow over it and then come to realize it works well.

I think for sure, that is a feature that you should highly consider adding. THAT is a high octane sep program.

[DDSol]

Lol.

I was talking about the choice between the two. a) Use yellow and blue and b) use white and black. They both make gray. A decision has to be made which combination to use. I programmed it to use white and black. But if there's no white or no black, and there's a yellow and a blue, then it will use that. It has no choice so there's no choice to be made.

So I was referring to having the program make these decisions or allowing the user to make changes. It's a very complex process. There can be many different sub volumes of the color space each mixed with their own set of inks. Currently, I have these volumes be seamless, that is, where one ends, the other begins. It would also be possible to make it so a volume overlaps with another one. In this case, one would be used (based on some ordering?). This would produce discontinuities in the seps, however, so I don't think it would be beneficial.

That said, even though there's no octane involved in my sepper, I'd say it already is a high octane sep program. I think it's Awesome, although it's so simple to use that it seems it's a simple program. I think it's part of the charm of it. It has no bells and whistles are wholly absent as well. It's so easy a one armed monkey could do it. Easy for the user, that is. From my end, I know the boatload of complexity that goes into making this work. It's like me sending my sep jobs to you. From my point of view it's really easy: Send Dan art and cash and get back seps. Easy as pie! But you know that "under the hood" there's a lot of stuff involved.

And I can say with great confidence that my software is many times more complex than the other guys' (with the exception maybe of Coudray? I can't say...). I do know that my program uses some 30,000 lines of code to make it tick. It's not a quick hack by any means. And that's only the tip of the iceberg. I have run many tests in order to get to this point. Those tests count for another 35,000 lines of code.  I couldn't have built it without them.

And each of those lines does something useful (I didn't count empty lines). This usefulness is what makes the program so awesome. It is not a macro. It does not "pull" colors, ever. Not even anything like "pulling" is going on. It will never have more than 4 colors layered over top of one another, not percentage-wise or anything. With a "pulling" technique, you can pull a gray whether i's already gray or not. You can pull the same color twice. You can pull a red and a red-magenta and have the colors on both films. Pulling is bad. Pulling says: "I have this ink, now what part of the image should be on the film for this ink?" for each ink. That's a  bad question. It assumes we have a film and want to fill it. We don't. We have an image and want to print it. The films are not the target, the image is. The films are a product of the image, not the ink. Pulling is bad. Notice HSB or HSW or whatever we call it these days, from AA, still uses pulling, but only for the hues. We don't "pull" backs or whites. They are produced from the image. But then we use selection (=evil) to pull the Hues out. That's not quite right. But it comes very, very close, depending on which colors you pull and how you pull them. AA uses 6 or 12 preset hues (the colored corners of the color cube and the midpoints between them). Because of the even spacing in both cases, the pull is perfect. Of course, layering is still an issue. Yellow on red is different from red on yellow. But the pull doesn't know that, care about that, or address it in any way.

So, yeah, I think I already have high octane power under the hood. But it's like one of those luxury cars: 18 billion HP, but not a whisper. Push button start. Push button parallel parking. Awesome, and all the awesome is quietly roaring under the hood.

As far as ink viscosity and mesh thread thickness, emulsion, exposure dot gain, timing, holy mackerel. There's a lot of "stuff" there. But none of that stuff influences the initial seps. That part just figures how much we want on the shirt, not how to actually get that amount on the actual substrate. I cannot, ever, guarantee that that goes right. Hell, if the printer has a cold, he may sneeze and ruin the print. He may forget to add this or that to the ink to make it flow right. I can't help it. I can account for many parameters, but it shouldn't become unwieldy to use. A mesh count and ink brand should be enough. Nothing else is needed. Then there's a prescription list that tells you to tension your screens and be careful not to expose too long and use a thin layer of the right emulsion, not to skimp on squeegees and keep the shop clean. But this is stuff a screen printer needs to do/know whether they use my program or not and whether they follow this or not has no bearing on the quality of my sep program, and I feel it's not exactly fair to judge a program on that. Moreover, what could I do if the printer select "I use substandard equipment with ink I grabbed from a  ballpoint pen on old rags I found in the attic" after I allow this selection? Would I still be required to send seps that will produce awesome prints? Rather, I think, you do the best you can, as a printer, and I do the best I can, as the sepper, and then when it comes together it will be a product of both. Even if you totally suck at printing, it will still look better with my seps. I think that's the point.

So, I put in My Awesome, they put in their Awesome and the product is Awesome²!. That's pretty damn awesome. Where's the catch? What's the problem?

Sure, if you totally suck and know it, and you hire a pro sepper, you may ask him "How the hell do I get this on a shirt?" and for the appropriate fee (free?), this guy (you, Dan) may tell this printer all about how to print perfectly. I think I'll add a link to a few videos to combat that gap. It's not the same as 1-on-1 consulting, but it's a heck of a lot cheaper. Almost affordable even (free).

I can't find a real (as in real-life) issue here (that actually matters). I mean, if there is, I want to know. I really do. I'm not trying to be unrealistic for the sake of feeling better about how freaking awesome I am (which I totally am, of course). Denial doesn't pay, so I'd like to not live there...

[Dottonedan]

Have to be honest here... And having to come to understand even far more in the last several weeks. The human eye or thinking is irrelevant in the digital color space the math is the math there is no way around that.

True. agree as I stated with DDsol above. Still tho, even in HSB, let alone all of the other programs and procedures, Math is Math, but printing is printing and getting it to print...is different than getting it to look right on screen and breaking the colors down to spot colors "on screen".



No matter "how" you get a sep completed, you have to make it work. I know your new HSB script is a nice way to break out colors, as is a few other methods, but like choosing HSB over other methods, (for specific needs), on things that I do, HSB can be the BEST option thus far, (for those specific things). That use is very limited. I would not use it for all things. For many, is can be a great option to obtain color breakouts. Like DDsol has defined, THAT is really what should be created. Something that is more intuitive to where you can go in and make calculated adjustments or pre-sep adjustments and define how each area should be treated. not just color tweaking, but area tweaking. THIS would sell like hotcakes for the endless amount of incoming beginners and even the more seasoned. The Pro's may purchase deals to use the product on everything they do, to go through DDsols new program faster and more accurately...and pay him a discounted rate for being a MASS user.  So they can still make a living at doing seps or add that into tho other things they offer like jpg to vector etc.

I mean common we all believed these seps could only be done with this special process for so many years when in reality we were all wrong all along..

Not wrong. What you offer, is just another vehicle. Another means to an end result. Sure, we can agree that it does a good job. Lets even say that it's THE way to convert colors. ok. Still, you have to convert this HSB color space...to various PMS color seps and you STILL print out the colors. You do that either thru Corel or Photoshop and you're still using PMS colors to simulate the photo. This is called Simulated or "fake" process.  Call it Simulated phot printing. I don't mins "waht" you name it" but it's still simulating an image thru blending pms colors with one another to create other colors. It's a simulated procedure or process.

I even loaded a copy of CorelDRAW 8 a 16 year old version of the program on my system and did perfect HSB seps in less than 5 minutes.

  People convert art to 4 color process in 1 min. How fast you do it, (is a selling point) to those that don't know or do'nt see the forest thru the trees.


For the many who are not going to be shooting for awards,  THIS is your market. They are the ones that will be gleaming at the idea of getting easy usable great seps (in 5 minutes). For those like Rick Roth, Mark Coudrey, Andy Anderson, etc. speed is not as important as how well it can be used on press accurately for the most efficient manor. How they get there is not important as accuracy and efficacy.  For the average shop, you have a vast target audience.


lets take the well known 4 color process conversion method. it's truley printed in CMYK when using this conversion method.  80% of the work out there on colored garments is not cmyk, but many have used the CMYK conversion like they might a HSB conversion. Much of what a non printer thinks is a 4 color process image or photo is converted to what the industry has loosely called sim process. We all have converted art to CMYK (as one of our options to break down colors) since we started screen printing colors on shirts. Many have even used the RGB or even LAB channels to break down color.


The HSB has come to light by you as being another method and presents cleaner colors. That I do not disagree with. Here is the trouble I see with it. 1, it doesn't do (what DDsol) is talking about doing in his program). To boot, This "cleaner color" still does not translate a perfect print accurately when used on press due to the variables (to name just one), is the printing ink used that are in theory, (color contaminated). Even the WHITE is contaminated with tints of blue in some screen printing inks. This should tell you that using an HSB method is not going to present pure color (on press) and it's not that big of a improvement over using a RGB. LAB, or a CMYK conversion methods. Sure, it's cleaner. I agree with you on that whole heartedly.  Ok. Back then to the same issues on press as the other methods present as well. The print variables. If we could take a monitor and place it on every tee shirt, then, THEN we would ahve great reason to use HSB.

To enhance that statement, Some artist still ONLY create ALL of their art in channels, never having the art ever touch a mode more than MULTI CHANNEL. No RGB, no CMYK, no LAB and no HSB other than a screen shot or merge to RGB so they can put it on a mock up garment.


Channel art and separating from those channels... is THE BEST way to achieve accurate color prints on press when comparing to the original art created. So to "say" that HSB is THE WAY and that using channels is an inaccurate method is just not true. HSB is "another way" to break color down. we don't even have HSB ink colors so the fact that your converting to HSB color space is kind of irrelevant isn't it? I mean, you do still end up assigning pms colors and printing out of Corel as a single color place that blends with other colors in that design...to simulate the look of the original... but like converting to CMYK, (it's a fast method) and better color space than using a CMYK conversion.  The technique of pulling colors out using all of the other options...is just another process procedure.


When Mark Coudrey came out with HI FI printing, CMYK + (the added specially formulated inks) It looked brighter and cleaner when done right. Thats the kicker, the shop still needs to do everything right and with that type of printing, all parameters needed to be stellar. I liked it. It's popularity faded tho, I think due to needing to buy/pay a premium price for these specially formulated inks. (I'm guessing).  Mark was on more of the right track pertaining to color space on print. You need ot look into developing a cost effective ink that works with your HSB process to be able to sell it as something more unique than it really is. Sure, you will make boo coo $ on your marketing techniques, selling it as "the way". But I think that if DDsol gets his going fast, buying a Simpleseps HSB converter script is going to be as interestingly beneficial as buying any other automated sep program.

Color adjustments and art tweaking are NOT color separating. Obviously file/art preparation work is often required as with any form of printing but preping is not separating.

Don't forget art clean up/improvements. HSB nor DDsol does that. So that is one thing that is a benefit of using any pro separator. probably 60% of the jobs I sep already, need some clean up.

[DDSol]

Don't forget art clean up/improvements. HSB nor DDsol does that. So that is one thing that is a benefit of using any pro separator. probably 60% of the jobs I sep already, need some clean up.

I don't agree at all with this statement. Why? Because this "clean up" is not sepping, and has nothing to do with sepping besides that it's a possible step before sepping. It isn't a pro-separator that does this, it's a graphics designer (it doesn't take an artist, because the art is already done). So you have 2 hats and when bad art comes in, you put on your GD hat. When cleanup is done, you switch to your PS hat.

I think that the proficiency level of a screen printer is in large part (70% even?) the level of their graphics proficiency, whether that be art or raw ability to work with their software of choice (which should be Corel, as AA says, not because AA says so, or because Corel is so great, but because it's the best and miles better than Crappy Adobe products. Not to say that Corel doesn't suck, but their product is better. I've heard bad things about Corel, the company. Adobe makes products that have too many buttons in too many hidden places that are too small and the whole thing is needlessly complicated. I can't work with that crap. Also, a seasoned IT professional, I can't work the Mac either. What a bunch of crap! You can't even maximize a window. That stupid pretty "dock" is non rectangular and it's a mess, screen real estate-wise. And window management is a mess. You can't scale a window grabbing it by the top. Just not allowed (and the reason is???). I know, Apple is known for "beautiful design" and all and "so simple a monkey could use it" but I can't work with it. And Adobe generally makes shitty products, anywhere from PS and AI to Flash designer and Dreamweaver. I put all this in parentheses so I can get away with this rant. Is it working? And yes, I bash Adobe. Excuse me, but it's not my fault that Adobe stuff sucks. It's like heroin, and when you're addicted to it you defend it. But that don't make it good. I will elaborate on this more later, of course, because I need to get it all off my chest, but I'll try to make it in small(ish) chunks so I don't piss too many people off too much at once and maybe I'll steer clear of the flame wars.)

So yeah, a screen printer that doesn't know how to clean up their art is... uh... a pretty sad one. Let's hope he learns quickly! It's a vital part of a growing serigraphic business. But until you learn how to do it, pay someone else for the odd job you need it on! Sure! I'm sure Dan knows how to do this stuff! Send it to him! He's awesome, I hear. Plus, he has his own website! But don't expect to compete with the Big Boys if you can't clean up some art or vector it if it's simple.

Heck, even I can do this stuff. And I'm a programmer and system's designer. All the graphics I really need is a banner here and there or an icon. Get with the program people! The more you know, the more $$$ you make! Pull your head out of the printshop and figure out Corel!

And for CRYING OUT LOUD, can we please ALL learn the shortcut keys?

It irks me to no end when I see these videos on YouTube and people right-click and click "zoom out". Or go into the menu to group! Ctrl-G people!

Anyway, I'm in a ranty-mood so I better stop...

[AdvancedArtist]

Have to be honest here... And having to come to understand even far more in the last several weeks. The human eye or thinking is irrelevant in the digital color space the math is the math there is no way around that.

True. agree as I stated with DDsol above. Still tho, even in HSB, let alone all of the other programs and procedures, Math is Math, but printing is printing and getting it to print...is different than getting it to look right on screen and breaking the colors down to spot colors "on screen".



No matter "how" you get a sep completed, you have to make it work. I know your new HSB script is a nice way to break out colors, as is a few other methods, but like choosing HSB over other methods, (for specific needs), on things that I do, HSB can be the BEST option thus far, (for those specific things). That use is very limited. I would not use it for all things. For many, is can be a great option to obtain color breakouts. Like DDsol has defined, THAT is really what should be created. Something that is more intuitive to where you can go in and make calculated adjustments or pre-sep adjustments and define how each area should be treated. not just color tweaking, but area tweaking. THIS would sell like hotcakes for the endless amount of incoming beginners and even the more seasoned. The Pro's may purchase deals to use the product on everything they do, to go through DDsols new program faster and more accurately...and pay him a discounted rate for being a MASS user.  So they can still make a living at doing seps or add that into tho other things they offer like jpg to vector etc.

I mean common we all believed these seps could only be done with this special process for so many years when in reality we were all wrong all along..

Not wrong. What you offer, is just another vehicle. Another means to an end result. Sure, we can agree that it does a good job. Lets even say that it's THE way to convert colors. ok. Still, you have to convert this HSB color space...to various PMS color seps and you STILL print out the colors. You do that either thru Corel or Photoshop and you're still using PMS colors to simulate the photo. This is called Simulated or "fake" process.  Call it Simulated phot printing. I don't mins "waht" you name it" but it's still simulating an image thru blending pms colors with one another to create other colors. It's a simulated procedure or process.

I even loaded a copy of CorelDRAW 8 a 16 year old version of the program on my system and did perfect HSB seps in less than 5 minutes.

  People convert art to 4 color process in 1 min. How fast you do it, (is a selling point) to those that don't know or do'nt see the forest thru the trees.


For the many who are not going to be shooting for awards,  THIS is your market. They are the ones that will be gleaming at the idea of getting easy usable great seps (in 5 minutes). For those like Rick Roth, Mark Coudrey, Andy Anderson, etc. speed is not as important as how well it can be used on press accurately for the most efficient manor. How they get there is not important as accuracy and efficacy.  For the average shop, you have a vast target audience.


lets take the well known 4 color process conversion method. it's truley printed in CMYK when using this conversion method.  80% of the work out there on colored garments is not cmyk, but many have used the CMYK conversion like they might a HSB conversion. Much of what a non printer thinks is a 4 color process image or photo is converted to what the industry has loosely called sim process. We all have converted art to CMYK (as one of our options to break down colors) since we started screen printing colors on shirts. Many have even used the RGB or even LAB channels to break down color.


The HSB has come to light by you as being another method and presents cleaner colors. That I do not disagree with. Here is the trouble I see with it. 1, it doesn't do (what DDsol) is talking about doing in his program). To boot, This "cleaner color" still does not translate a perfect print accurately when used on press due to the variables (to name just one), is the printing ink used that are in theory, (color contaminated). Even the WHITE is contaminated with tints of blue in some screen printing inks. This should tell you that using an HSB method is not going to present pure color (on press) and it's not that big of a improvement over using a RGB. LAB, or a CMYK conversion methods. Sure, it's cleaner. I agree with you on that whole heartedly.  Ok. Back then to the same issues on press as the other methods present as well. The print variables. If we could take a monitor and place it on every tee shirt, then, THEN we would ahve great reason to use HSB.

To enhance that statement, Some artist still ONLY create ALL of their art in channels, never having the art ever touch a mode more than MULTI CHANNEL. No RGB, no CMYK, no LAB and no HSB other than a screen shot or merge to RGB so they can put it on a mock up garment.


Channel art and separating from those channels... is THE BEST way to achieve accurate color prints on press when comparing to the original art created. So to "say" that HSB is THE WAY and that using channels is an inaccurate method is just not true. HSB is "another way" to break color down. we don't even have HSB ink colors so the fact that your converting to HSB color space is kind of irrelevant isn't it? I mean, you do still end up assigning pms colors and printing out of Corel as a single color place that blends with other colors in that design...to simulate the look of the original... but like converting to CMYK, (it's a fast method) and better color space than using a CMYK conversion.  The technique of pulling colors out using all of the other options...is just another process procedure.


When Mark Coudrey came out with HI FI printing, CMYK + (the added specially formulated inks) It looked brighter and cleaner when done right. Thats the kicker, the shop still needs to do everything right and with that type of printing, all parameters needed to be stellar. I liked it. It's popularity faded tho, I think due to needing to buy/pay a premium price for these specially formulated inks. (I'm guessing).  Mark was on more of the right track pertaining to color space on print. You need ot look into developing a cost effective ink that works with your HSB process to be able to sell it as something more unique than it really is. Sure, you will make boo coo $ on your marketing techniques, selling it as "the way". But I think that if DDsol gets his going fast, buying a Simpleseps HSB converter script is going to be as interestingly beneficial as buying any other automated sep program.

Color adjustments and art tweaking are NOT color separating. Obviously file/art preparation work is often required as with any form of printing but preping is not separating.

Don't forget art clean up/improvements. HSB nor DDsol does that. So that is one thing that is a benefit of using any pro separator. probably 60% of the jobs I sep already, need some clean up.

Let us please try to avoid complicating this topic.... Mojo is a myth it does NOT exist in the digital color space it is pure math. In this space opinions are meaningless.

1. I am not talking about a script or any other program I have clearly shown how this works manually.
2. The channels in PS are mathematically incorrect we have clearly demonstrated that and if you need more evidence I can provide that also.
3. Select color range and many PS tools are also mathematically incorrect I can prove that too.

Therefore in the wrong color space with the wrong tools you need hours to manually recreate the art into separations.

When you are in the correct color space using the correct math and tools hours become minutes perhaps even seconds.

[Dottonedan]

Let us please try avoid complicating this topic.... Mojo is a myth it does exist in the digital color space it is pure math. In this space opinions are meaningless.


Let us not try to confuse people with misleading words to imply that other methods are not valid, such as " the wrong way to go, mathematically incorrect, Myths, Mojo. You can find many tuts on separating sim process on the net that show their process that they use for free.



What you don't see promoted is the old school way of building the art completely in channels and printing from those seps. How fast is that sep process?  Well, by the time you're done with the art, you're done with the seps. So that is pretty fast and more accurate than any other method.

1. I am not talking about a script or any other program I have clearly shown how this works manually.

  I may stand corrected. I assumed SimpleSeps was an automated product (now incorporating HBS) to separate colors from Corel.  Yes, you've shown how it works. It works like any other procedure to break down colors manually, just using a lesser used technique due to taking advantage of the HSB color mode. It's a different angle of the same, but I do agree, HSB is cleaner color. Then we take it to print and we are back to the same sim process. Thats the only thing about the whole HSB being THE WAY.  Thats my take on it. I'm sure you disagree.  Now, is it a good product.. this SimpleSeps using HSB?  Sure.  I don't doubt that at all.  Is it even better than any of the others?  Some of them, I'm sure. Some of those others have better, more intuitive abilities but how much better it really is compared to the others is pretty much just a guess since I don't have all of them.

2. The channels in PS are mathematically incorrect we have clearly demonstrated that and if you need more evidence I can provide that also.

  I don't think you have. None that I've seen. I've watched your vids and didn't see where it's mathematically incorrect.  I saw where some curves were shown in very extreme cases that would not be used in an actual procedure of separating or adjusting as a tool to signify how inaccurate it is (while you chime in to say, "so using channels is the wrong way to go". It wasn't convincing to me at all. Perhaps you can elaborate on that to show more clearly why channel seps are incorrect.  In HSBSimpleseps seps, a 5% of a tone is the same as a 5 % tint on a channel separation.  I see you make adjustments for don't gain. So does Channels. You can do that in may methods of the process.

3. Select color range and many PS tools are also mathematically incorrect I can prove that too.

For the Color range tool tho, I bet you can prove that it's not a good or best choice of making selections. I don't recommend it either.

Therefore in the wrong color space with the wrong tools you need hours to manually recreate the art into separations.

  Not so.  The time that it takes is all relative to the skill of the person and the job at hand. Some 6 color jobs take 15-30 min. others and most, take more, how much more is different for each job.

When you are in the correct color space using the correct math and tools hours become minutes perhaps even seconds.

That might be true. Similar to how many convert to RGB or CMYK to use elements of those channels for separation, it can be very fast. Tools are tools, no matter where they come from.
Many people have been using the same tools you have shown in your vids for break down color. It's not a method that I prefer to use, but others have been and for many of them, it's all they know. For them, they complete a sep in 5, 10, 30 minutes as well. They just didn't do it in HSB sim process.

[AdvancedArtist]

When Mark Coudrey came out with HI FI printing, CMYK + (the added specially formulated inks) It looked brighter and cleaner when done right. Thats the kicker, the shop still needs to do everything right and with that type of printing, all parameters needed to be stellar.

To be honest Dan I no longer hold Mark or any other separator as a guru.. HSB was in DRAW 16 years ago both he and I failed to recognize that almost 2 decades ago, but it was there all along. It was a long journey. Legends and lies strange how they seem to fit into place like the pieces of a puzzle.

[AdvancedArtist]

Let us please try avoid complicating this topic.... Mojo is a myth it does exist in the digital color space it is pure math. In this space opinions are meaningless.


Let us not try to confuse people with misleading words to imply that other methods are not valid, such as " the wrong way to go, mathematically incorrect, Myths, Mojo. You can find many tuts on separating sim process on the net that show their process that they use for free.



What you don't see promoted is the old school way of building the art completely in channels and printing from those seps. How fast is that sep process?  Well, by the time you're done with the art, you're done with the seps. So that is pretty fast and more accurate than any other method.

1. I am not talking about a script or any other program I have clearly shown how this works manually.

  I may stand corrected. I assumed SimpleSeps was an automated product (now incorporating HBS) to separate colors from Corel.  Yes, you've shown how it works. It works like any other procedure to break down colors manually, just using a lesser used technique due to taking advantage of the HSB color mode. It's a different angle of the same, but I do agree, HSB is cleaner color. Then we take it to print and we are back to the same sim process. Thats the only thing about the whole HSB being THE WAY.  Thats my take on it. I'm sure you disagree.  Now, is it a good product.. this SimpleSeps using HSB?  Sure.  I don't doubt that at all.  Is it even better than any of the others?  Some of them, I'm sure. Some of those others have better, more intuitive abilities but how much better it really is compared to the others is pretty much just a guess since I don't have all of them.

2. The channels in PS are mathematically incorrect we have clearly demonstrated that and if you need more evidence I can provide that also.

  I don't think you have. None that I've seen. I've watched your vids and didn't see where it's mathematically incorrect.  I saw where some curves were shown in very extreme cases that would not be used in an actual procedure of separating or adjusting as a tool to signify how inaccurate it is (while you chime in to say, "so using channels is the wrong way to go". It wasn't convincing to me at all. Perhaps you can elaborate on that to show more clearly why channel seps are incorrect.  In HSBSimpleseps seps, a 5% of a tone is the same as a 5 % tint on a channel separation.  I see you make adjustments for don't gain. So does Channels. You can do that in may methods of the process.

3. Select color range and many PS tools are also mathematically incorrect I can prove that too.

For the Color range tool tho, I bet you can prove that it's not a good or best choice of making selections. I don't recommend it either.

Therefore in the wrong color space with the wrong tools you need hours to manually recreate the art into separations.

  Not so.  The time that it takes is all relative to the skill of the person and the job at hand. Some 6 color jobs take 15-30 min. others and most, take more, how much more is different for each job.

When you are in the correct color space using the correct math and tools hours become minutes perhaps even seconds.

That might be true. Similar to how many convert to RGB or CMYK to use elements of those channels for separation, it can be very fast. Tools are tools, no matter where they come from.
Many people have been using the same tools you have shown in your vids for break down color. It's not a method that I prefer to use, but others have been and for many of them, it's all they know. For them, they complete a sep in 5, 10, 30 minutes as well. They just didn't do it in HSB sim process.

I have spent hours upon hours examining color and its math and science. I have talked with some of the best color science minds in the world to consult with me to make sure that I know what I am talking about. It is no longer an I think I know what I am talking about game.

lets proceed peacefully and correct the industry....

[DDSol]

In the blue corner we have the heavyweight champion! Revered for his sheer dexterity in the art of belligerence, and so far undefeated, yet slightly diminished! On the red corner we have the King of Kalm, with an endless stream of Tranquility his weapon of choice! Unmatched fairness and powerful patience are his tools of the trade!

Let the games begin!

Ps. HSB, Channels, Layers, blahblahblah. They are bytes in memory and there is no difference whatsoever between them, except PS likes to put color management in channels which it can't do in layers. But you can control that color management, so you can make them exactly the same. The argument is moot.

Besides, they're all the wrong color space. Sepping should be done in a linear space, be that Lab, XYZ or linear RGB, it's irrelevant. HSB is directly derived from (s)RGB in a linear fashion.And CMYK? Linear from "some" RGB (sRGB or Linear RGB): C1=255-R; M1=255-G; Y1=255-b; K=Max(C1,M1,Y1); C=C1-K; M=M1-K; Y=Y1-K;

Yum! Code! So, everybody's wrong. Who wins?

And about "Simulated Process": It's a Freakin' Farce!

"Sim Process" is stupid in the sense that Who The Hell is Actually Trying To Simulate Anything? We're printing Shirts! The name of the forum is "TheShirtForum" and Plastisol is the tool of choice. You can print in real process colors, YES, but when you are NOT printing with real process inks, it doesn't mean you're trying to simulate that! That's like saying your inkjet uses a "Simulated Monitor Separation System". WTF? It's totally different. It uses partitive mixing! CMY(K) is subtractive. RGB is additive. They are 3 different things and they can be related by formulas, yes, but they're different beasts!

I vote we from now on call CMYK printing "Simulated Tonal Spot Color Printing". I vote we call monitors "Real Life Visual Simulators". And when we print a car on a shirt, we call it a "Visual Vehicular Simulation".

I think, honestly, Calling it Sim Process or Tonal Spot, it doesn't matter. Plus, no one gives a crap where the seps come from: The printing is the same: Put ink on a screen and stroke. It's plastisol. It's a spot color. It's partitive mixing. It's a thing on its own and shouldn't be degraded by calling it "Simulated" Anything!

But it's water under the bridge. It has been established we call the printing of halftones using plastisol "Simulated Process". And so if we're going to accept that, then let's accept it. And how you get your seps doesn't change hwo you print it. Yes, SP may be a misnomer, but it's an accepted name nonetheless. Get over it.

Coudray, BTW, apparently (hearsay only, sorry) has done a bang-up job of formulating formulas that calculate color calculus. Calling him a guru reminds me of an Indian on a rug with incense wafting. I'm sure he knows his crap quite well. This makes him an expert, but not "the" expert.

HSB, for those who care to know, is a distorted color space. There's no smooth relation between it and RGB or sRGB. There is such a relation between L*a*b, RGB, sRGB (almost) and CIE XYZ. This is kind of important. A straight line drawn in the HSB space could have a corner in RGB, sRGB, XYZ and L*a*b. HSB is strongly related to L*u*v, but L*u*v does not have the discontinuity issues HSB does. Read more here. Read the whole section, or better yet, the whole page! Know your stuff. There's the Math, right there. No secrets. Just Real Understanding for All. No convincing needed! I mean, truth=truth is truth, no matter who says it or who tries to hide it.

That said, HSB seps will trip you up when you select a slightly pink red hue and a slightly red yellow hue, because the line between those colors cannot (ever) reach red (on the shirt). You can't mix ANY non-red to make red. Yet the HSB seps happily select the red and mark it as perfectly separated. That's bad... I mean, it's great but not the mathematically correct answer to the question: "How much of which inks do I need to make this color" for red.

Know what a color space is. It's 3D, so it requires a bit of spacial insight. Just be happy we only have 3 different kinds of color cones. If it were 4, it would have more dimensions than we're used to in our lives and it would be that much harder to grasp.

And don't forget: Put some Awesome into it. Awesome in, Awesome out!