Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: KM C6000 / confusion about profiling...

  1. #1
    oxident is offline Fiery Forum Expert Contributor oxident is on a distinguished path
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    678

    Default KM C6000 / confusion about profiling...

    Hi!

    I'm a little bit confused on what's the right way to create and profile a new paper type on my IC-306v3 / KM C6000 (with inline densitometer) using an ES-2000 within CWS / CPS.

    To my knowledge, the inline densitometer is trying to keep the printing density at the initial values, the technician measured when the printer was installed.

    So when I create a new calibration set within CWS' calibrator, I would say "create new calibration set", based on "colour specific paper" (which is the copiers media type with the linked inline-densitometer reading) and measure the linearization chart with my ES-2000. After measuring this chart, I notice two strange things in the result graph:
    Name:  mess2.png
Views: 1632
Size:  18.0 KB
    - the difference between measured and reference values is quite huge (to my opinion)
    - the measured values are somehow "wavy" ... even after repeating the procedure a few times

    I can't see any big problems in later quality tests, but I feel that something is wrong here.

    So basically, I have two questions:
    - Why are the measured values so wavy?
    - How does the Fiery know the reference values (which should be stored inside the printer's inline-densitometer)?

    Thanks for any help regarding this ;-)
    IC-306 v3.01 FS100 Pro / KM C6000, IC-308 v2.1 FS150 Pro / KM C71hc / SD-513, IC-414 / KM C754
    CWS 5.8 SP2, Windows 10 x64

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Did you ever figure out where the wavy measurement came from? I have a customer of mine that ran into this issue today and is having some color issues.

    Thanks

  3. #3
    oxident is offline Fiery Forum Expert Contributor oxident is on a distinguished path
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    678

    Default

    No. I've asked my contact at KM and they didn't think that it might be problem (as long as the colors are generally ok).

    But I guess it has something to do with the measurement target. I used to select the one with the patches in random order. Maybe that's problem.

    Did you already try the "sorted" version instead of the random one?
    IC-306 v3.01 FS100 Pro / KM C6000, IC-308 v2.1 FS150 Pro / KM C71hc / SD-513, IC-414 / KM C754
    CWS 5.8 SP2, Windows 10 x64

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Foster City, CA
    Posts
    287

    Default RE: KM C6000 / confusion about profiling...

    A couple of points here. First, be aware that the internal densitometer setup is keyed to a name on the press. You need to associate that name with the paper in the tray at the engine.

    Fiery calibrator only asks you the paper to start with to save you time setting paper type etc. But you should take the slow approach anyway - when you make a new calibration, base it on whatever you want then go set paper type and weight, and the tray if you need to. On the Image tab set the resolution and the screen the tech set up for your paper on the inline densitometer. You'll always need to use this screen / resolution setting after you make a calibration for it - if you want a different screen later you'll minimally need to calibrate and profile for it. To get it all the way right you might need the tech to come back and do all the density balance adjust type steps then make a new setup for the inline densitometer for the new screen on a given paper. That part might be ok to skip that but as on analog presses, screens and resolutions have specific tonal charateristics so for best results you should make a new calibration set and profile for a certain screen/resolution/paper type combination.

    So why are those lines so wavy? Thatís easy - your press is not linear. And we donít expect it to be- thatís why we calibrate.

    Those plots donít show the real calibration that will be applied to jobs, they show the current tonal response as measured. Technically the inverse of those curves will be applied to your print so that the smooth targets shown are matched - good news is this is all you need to care about.

    If you re-calibrate later on the same paper you started with using the same screen setting and resolution then you'll get back to the same target linearity for a long time, meaning your output profile made after calibrating will also last a long time.

    To answer your second question the Fiery has its own target values for visual linearity that are not the same as the press's targets might be.

    This leads to one more question - if I used the inline why am I not already linear? The answer lies in patch order. Toner devices have toner adhere very efficiently when there is the same toner adjacent. The Fiery offers sorted patch sets that take advantage of this as do most calibration systems.

    But jobs donít look like that, right? There are all kinds of different toner densities in different colors all adjacent in a real print. So the way to simulate this is to use the random aka ďunsortedĒ calibration patches on the Fiery both to make a new calibration and to recalibrate later. Always use the largest patch set available (34 on most Fierys) to get more samples around the drum on a large paper size. Even if you plan to print on smaller sheets the whole drum will always be used so you want it all included in the calibration and re-calibrations.

    This might seem a little complicated, so one way to make it easy is to get Fiery Color Profiler Suite which creates a calibration, an output profile with expert settings based on the press manufacturer-approved profiling settings pulled from the factory default profile for a given paper type, and links all this together with the paper settings and imaging settings (screen and resolution) you used. This is all linked into a Fiery preset that can be selected in one click through Job Properties or used to configure workflows using a virtual printers and/or hotfolders.

    ~Lou

  5. #5
    oxident is offline Fiery Forum Expert Contributor oxident is on a distinguished path
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Thanks Lou for this fundamental and detailed information. Things are starting to become clear to me...

    To sum it up:
    The inline densitometer's purpose is to restore the toner density to a defined level. That's the level the Fiery expects the machine to be (and to which is was profiled).

    Fiery's calibration (or better said: linearization) process than fills the remaining gap, right?

    My machine has been setup at the time we owned an IC413. At this time, the technician also created the settings for the internal densitometer and profiled the Fiery using KM's Color Care application.

    Then we switched to an IC306 and simply copied the output ICC profile to that new Fiery.

    As I'm not sure if this process retained all relevant target values I'm not sure if there might be a problem with my output profile.

    Would you recommend that I create a new output profile using CPS in order to have everything sync'd correctly? Could I safely skip the process of creating a new linearization target in the machine itself?
    IC-306 v3.01 FS100 Pro / KM C6000, IC-308 v2.1 FS150 Pro / KM C71hc / SD-513, IC-414 / KM C754
    CWS 5.8 SP2, Windows 10 x64

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    15

    Default KM C6000 / confusion about profiling...

    I would recommend.

    If custom data was created as you mentioned for the internal densitometer, and if it has been some time since this process was done, I would do it again.

    And then use CWS & CPS to calibrate and generate a new output profile as was mentioned.

    This normally will give you the best results.

    If you skip doing the first step the risk is your print engine may not be at it's best output capability when creating the output profile.

  7. #7
    oxident is offline Fiery Forum Expert Contributor oxident is on a distinguished path
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Okay, thanks for making this clear. I guess I'll try skipping the internal densitometer's "re-linearization" because KM charges a quite reasonable amount for doing this
    IC-306 v3.01 FS100 Pro / KM C6000, IC-308 v2.1 FS150 Pro / KM C71hc / SD-513, IC-414 / KM C754
    CWS 5.8 SP2, Windows 10 x64

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Foster City, CA
    Posts
    287

    Default RE:KM C6000 / confusion about profiling...

    ITs up to you whether you have them re-do the internal. I would definetly make a new cal and profile for Fiery, and try it with CPS 4.6 doing both, no CWS.

    You will be using CWS to recalibrate and a good sanity check it to look at the maximum densities measured when re-calibrating compared to the expected Dmax's from when the cal was first created. If these values are off by more than 0.10 0.20 then you need to do something to get the engine back up to the expected dMaxs.

    One more hint, first page out is not the one to calibrate or re-calibrate with . Always print at least 5 warmup sheets if using CPS or 5 copies of the cal when calibrating or re-calibrating from CWS.

  9. #9
    oxident is offline Fiery Forum Expert Contributor oxident is on a distinguished path
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Okay, then my final question would be if you believe CPS can achieve a result which is comparable to what KM's ColorCare software can produce?
    IC-306 v3.01 FS100 Pro / KM C6000, IC-308 v2.1 FS150 Pro / KM C71hc / SD-513, IC-414 / KM C754
    CWS 5.8 SP2, Windows 10 x64

  10. #10
    adam1991 is offline Fiery Forum Expert Contributor adam1991 has proven very helpful adam1991 has proven very helpful adam1991 has proven very helpful adam1991 has proven very helpful adam1991 has proven very helpful
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,029

    Default

    I believe CPS 4.6 can do one great job, close to what Color Care 2.3 offers. The Express profiling is quick and easy and effective with a Fiery.

    That being said, I think Color Care does a better job--but in a way and to a degree that no one would really care. I'd take CPS Express profiling as a process over the Color Care process, if it meant someone would actually do it instead of thinking about it.

    And modern Creo profiling gives results pretty much identical to Color Care.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts