Should my proofer match the limited gamut of each our presses/substrate or should it match GRACoL? I believe that many print shops have device profiles for their proofers that will match the presses and each of the substrates.
I am of the opinion that I should get my presses as close to GRACoL as I can while making sure they hit G7. My proofer is already within GRACoL specs. While this method works for the majority of our customers, I don’t want to over-simplify my workflow just because it’s easier, nor do I want to over-complicate it and risk taking on something that involves more maintenance than I have time for.
I can offer an over-simplified answer… If your proofer doesn’t match the press/substrate you’re trying to proof, then it isn’t a proofer making a proof; it’s a printer making a print.
Are you able to get an accurate proof of your press/substrate(s) now, with the method you’re using? If so, why change anything at all? Regardless if your proofer matches Gracol, SWOP, G7 or anything else, it doesn’t matter at all if your proofer isn’t creating accurate proofs of whichever press/substrate you’re trying to simulate.
It’s one thing for a press to match Gracol, G7, SWOP, etc because that keeps everything in check, helps with process control, keeps output looking the same/similar day to day & week to week & so on. But IMHO the proofer has one thing & only one thing its required to match, that being the device it is simulating.
Thank you Aaron. This is exactly the type of response that I was hoping to get - I think I just needed to hear it from someone else in the industry. The method I had been using may work for most jobs and most customer expectations, but if the rest of the industry is producing proofs that more closely match each press and substrate, it’s worth it for me to invest the time to learn and implement your logic into our workflow. My biggest concern is to unknowingly lose good customers because they can tell a flawed color workflow when they see one.
