AccuRIP and the dot gain setup....WTH!!!!

[ZooCity]

Now another question...our 5% was reading as 14.5% so when outputting after adjusting the Dot Gain Control feature I get nothing printed at 4% and below.  Is there anything that I can do to address this?  This will not mean much of anything for 99.9% of the stuff we currently print but why settle for mediocrity!

This was my question from the other thread.  Except I'm seeing data loss all over from it.  If it just clipped 4% and below I would probably be cool with that for 99% of our jobs too, but it's clipping all over in relation to the linearization curve. 

It's like it doesn't understand that I still want all the information available in the print file for each spot color, I just want it printed in a manner that compensates for gain.  Instead it's eliminating elements of the art, choking off the file instead of the output.  Seems kinda ass backwards to me. 

[ScreenPrinter123]

I was wondering if that is what you were saying in your other thread...I'm a little slow sometimes!

This does seem like a big deal because it did the same thing on the 80+ adjustments for us (maybe elsewhere as well as I have not spent much time with it other than noticing the glaringly obvious problems).  It outputs craziness, I guess because the highest percentages are so dark that the values you enter are close enough to make the rip output a mess.

Hopefully someone out there has some answers.

[ScreenPrinter123]

Any worthy rip options out there for Mac.  Would love to try FilmMaker but it is PC only and I would like to achieve better results than Accurip is allowing me to achieve.

[ZooCity]

I think Wasatch can run on OSX.  I hear ya on this and it's why I've been with AR for too long, I just hate having to switch between op systems, even though it's pretty easy with fusion, etc., but it is absolutely time to get setup with a better rip with some of the work we're running.

[ScreenPrinter123]

So I actually have Accurip set fairly well now.  I ended up doing several rounds of printing a sample file with the the varying percentages and adusting the numbers in the Dot Gain control a little each time.  For some reason if I took readings from the target file within Accurip and inputed the numbers in the Dot Gain feature it did not adjust them correctly.

I also emailed back and forth with Charlie and here are a couple reminders in the event that it helps anyone:

-  for a gradient that fades away to nothing go from 100% of that particular spot color to 0% of that spot color and not from 100% of that spot color to white.
-  if using illustrator use spot colors and output via host-bast separations and don't use the composite mode

Charlie said not doing the above can affect the films.  He also emphasized the importance of good film and inks and their ability to make great strides in controlling dot gain.

I will now give this thread a rest as I am pretty darn happy with the results I am now getting even though it took a few headaches to get there!

[ZooCity]

Huh, so you need to test it against your own file out of Illy v. the target file?

Are you seeing that data loss I was referring to in the other post still with this method?

[ScreenPrinter123]

I guess that wasn't as clear as it sounded in my head!!!

The target file for me was useless because the dot gain control was not adjusting correctly.  If the target 50% was reading as 65 I would input 65 in the 50 slot of the got gain control and then my sample file out of Illy would still be way off.  Thus I just started printing the Illy sample file over and over adjusting the dot gain after each one.  It is not perfect but it is waaayyyy closer than before and there is no data loss.

[ZooCity]

Cool, I'll try it.  Maybe the linearization : test file is going over the top with the adjustments, which would explain the data loss.  The numbers I have in my curve based off the test file are extreme.

[ScreenPrinter123]

Give it a shot because done the way they tell you to everything 90ish and above was solid and 4 and below was empty after inputting the numbers that were supposed to correctly adjust for the readings of the target.  It seems the dot gain feature was making bigger adjustments than I was telling it to.  Print your Illy file and read that and make small adjustments and repeat and hopefully you will have some success as I finally did.  In the end my curve had a lot less of a curve than what the readings of the target had called for.

[Dottonedan]

So, I tried this on the Epson 1430 due to my dots seeming too heavy.  I entered the values Pierre listed and again, heavier than what I am getting.


In fact, I am reading 0% in Photoshop while the film is kicking out a 1%.  Now, I know if you have the 0 set at 1, you will get 1% in all areas intended to be white so you don't want to have anything in the 0 location. This is not the case. I have a 0 in 0. So, I opened the art file and adjusted the curves to take out even more. Taking out what could be the 2% in this area.  Still, dots come out.


What gets me, is this RIP, based on how you all are describing to enter the values, It's bass awards. Like, some of or all of the rips I've worked on for dot gain compensation, is like curves in photoshop.   You want a 50, you drop the curve to 40 (for example).  Here, if you want a 50, you enter what you are getting/reading. If it's a 60, you enter in the 50 spot. BUT, it's not happening for me.  Still too heavy. The shadow tones especially.  Will look at it more later.

[lancasterprinthouse]

Digging up this dinosaur thread. I have Black Pearl and had Pierre read my output. Entered the values and ran a new output and everything looked better but values 85-100 were very heavy. 85 was darn near solid and 90-100 were solid black. Any idea what I may have done wrong?

Here is a photo



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dottonedan]

Lancasterprinthouse,


I'm sure you have worked this out by now, but I would assume that the readings from Pierre's will get you close only. Better than none or most, but not 100% the same. The reason being, you need to be using the same type of inks, and the the same weight droplet.  You can print out the Weight droplet test (onto film), and determine wha tis the best weight to use (to get solid images) with no light coming through...and down run or take a long time to dry. Thats what that test is for.  THEN, you can put in Peirre's numbers...and get closer. You can even ask him what he used for a weight droplet, but film type plays another factor.  All of these play. factor.  Ink type, Film brand, weight droplet amount (and art).  The art and color profiles are another much longer topic, but for started. Narrow down a good weight droplet and enter Pierre's numbers....and then lastly, adjust those numbers as needed.