Impetus
im·pe·tus (
m
p-t
s)
n. pl. im·pe·tus·es
Hmm, definition 2... "The force or energy associated with a moving body", intersting. There seems to be much "force" behind some of my projects. Project "A" seems to have picked up a lot of momentum. Workflow tools I've rediscovered have added much momentum. Plans that had been pushed out two months are now more immediate with a revised structure. Flow charts are such a wonderful thing for mapping out structures. Associating time frames with segments is a more difficult though. At any rate, the segments go back to the "cascade effect", or analagous to "stepping stones". Laying the core foundation for future expansion to allow for each module, or stepping stone, to be added as time progresses. It's quite fascinating really to see it layed out in front of you. Thankfully I have a lot of paper to map it all out on.
Project "B" has gone from "something that could happen" to "something that will be happening". This is really quite an amazing opportunity. There has been much background discussion and debate internally with the group as well as a significant amount of "sales" time. I'm really not a salesperson, but I seemed to have sold a client on my concept. This will be exciting, very exciting. This is where the "digital hub" concept comes into play. It does with Project "A" too, but in a different manner and methodology.
Normally I would not double dip blogs, but I'm not "normal".
"Digital Hub"
hub (h
b)
n.
So what "we" (me, myself and I) am looking to do is to create a workflow (in a smaller sense) where you essentially have a hub and spoke environment. Meaning that there is a central hub that controls or otherwise feeds the spokes. Such as a prepress workflow system, for example, that everything flows through and then is distributed to other systems or devices (the spokes). For this to succeed, you need to identify a commom file format; the lowest common denominator. For most people this is PDF although it could be another format depending on the genius of the devices being used. This hub must feed an amalgam of disperate systems. That's not to say that this hub will RIP a job and directly drive all the devices, even though it's possible. But it will standardize everything coming into the workflow and then pass it along so that each end point (RIP) will not have much to do but convert for that imaging device. All the heavy lifting occurs in the hub and then redirects the work coming out. From there the spokes perform their dedicated functions. Part of this is color transformations.
It's really quite simple and elegant when you lay it out and conceptualize it. It's a little different in implementation. But not too much.
Say you have five different devices that you image to. A press, proofer, black & white printers (DocuTech maybe) and two different color laser devices. How do you make sure that everything "fits"? First, you have to have a solid file (PDF in this case) which is your baseline document. From there, what do you do with it? Say someone wants 500 copies of a full color brochure. That quantity fits a digital press (or color laser in this case) for run length and C.P.U. Great, so you run it and the customer is happy. Now they want 5,000. That's not in the digital sweet spot. That's in the sweet spot for your small format press. So you run it and now it looks different, substantially different. What's up with that? The proof didn't match the press, which definately doesn't match the color laser device. How can that be? Did you employ any sort of color mangement? No? Well there you go. What can you use to manage the color? Throw a color server in the mix? What's that do with your workflow?
What if your digital hub could do all this? Normalize to a common file format, PDF, then repurpose that PDF for N number of different output "intents". That would be pretty powerful. Now imagine that you use ICC profiles for your devices. Are you going to re-color manage the native files? Well that's not very effective or efficient. Why not employ some sort of color management in your hub and let it repurpose the job and its color? So now you have a digital master file that can be moved from device to device and you can maintain color fidelity. Relatively speaking that is. There are limitations of color management and the color of the devices you image on. I mean really, solid plastic toner will be different than the ink in your press. But as a practical matter, the color will be close. Much closer than if you ran without profiles or compensation. It's like the difference with a inkjet and a press. Different, but can be made to match quite well. And that's the idea, or at least part of it. Get a common file format that can be easily ported to N number of different devices. And, with that system you can make color matches more easily attainable.
I have two customers who are doing just this. Everything goes through one system. Once in the system, they can be moved as manufacturing requirements dictate. They can direct it once to a Digimaster or DocuTech and then move it to a sheetfed press or web. Or in the case of color work, from a color Doc12 to a 3535 or 40" press. And then, they can take the job and make it a low res RGB PDF for a soft proof.
It's like a ROOM workflow. But it's not. In a ROOM workflow, you have a standard file fortmat, but it's not necessarily easily "portable", like screened one-bit TIFFs. Great for the press and proofer, but lousy for a color copier or black and white copier. So now you have two workflows. One for press and one for digital printing. Sure, maybe you "descreen" and or combine the separations but is that the best way? That's what makes PDF so attractive for that digital master. It is understood by many different devices and is functional in other applications outside of the printing world. You can't say that for CT/LW or screened one-bit TIFFs. Can you imagine trying to read a CT/LW PDF that is reasonably downloadable? That's going to look like hell and be bulky. Or you could have a screened one-bit TIFF made into a PDF. Possible, entirely possible. Now think of that screened one-bit TIFF being one color of a three color document. Not so easy now. Possible, but not so easy.
Pretty powerful eh? Kind of brings you back to my epiphany entry. I hope this makes sense, I hope it came out of my head well in words.
mp-ts)n. pl. im·pe·tus·es
- An impelling force; an impulse.
- The force or energy associated with a moving body.
- Something that incites; a stimulus.
- Increased activity in response to a stimulus: The approaching deadline gave impetus to the investigation.
Hmm, definition 2... "The force or energy associated with a moving body", intersting. There seems to be much "force" behind some of my projects. Project "A" seems to have picked up a lot of momentum. Workflow tools I've rediscovered have added much momentum. Plans that had been pushed out two months are now more immediate with a revised structure. Flow charts are such a wonderful thing for mapping out structures. Associating time frames with segments is a more difficult though. At any rate, the segments go back to the "cascade effect", or analagous to "stepping stones". Laying the core foundation for future expansion to allow for each module, or stepping stone, to be added as time progresses. It's quite fascinating really to see it layed out in front of you. Thankfully I have a lot of paper to map it all out on.
Project "B" has gone from "something that could happen" to "something that will be happening". This is really quite an amazing opportunity. There has been much background discussion and debate internally with the group as well as a significant amount of "sales" time. I'm really not a salesperson, but I seemed to have sold a client on my concept. This will be exciting, very exciting. This is where the "digital hub" concept comes into play. It does with Project "A" too, but in a different manner and methodology.
Normally I would not double dip blogs, but I'm not "normal".
"Digital Hub"
hub (h
b)n.
- The center part of a wheel, fan, or propeller.
- A center of activity or interest; a focal point. See Synonyms at center.
So what "we" (me, myself and I) am looking to do is to create a workflow (in a smaller sense) where you essentially have a hub and spoke environment. Meaning that there is a central hub that controls or otherwise feeds the spokes. Such as a prepress workflow system, for example, that everything flows through and then is distributed to other systems or devices (the spokes). For this to succeed, you need to identify a commom file format; the lowest common denominator. For most people this is PDF although it could be another format depending on the genius of the devices being used. This hub must feed an amalgam of disperate systems. That's not to say that this hub will RIP a job and directly drive all the devices, even though it's possible. But it will standardize everything coming into the workflow and then pass it along so that each end point (RIP) will not have much to do but convert for that imaging device. All the heavy lifting occurs in the hub and then redirects the work coming out. From there the spokes perform their dedicated functions. Part of this is color transformations.
It's really quite simple and elegant when you lay it out and conceptualize it. It's a little different in implementation. But not too much.
Say you have five different devices that you image to. A press, proofer, black & white printers (DocuTech maybe) and two different color laser devices. How do you make sure that everything "fits"? First, you have to have a solid file (PDF in this case) which is your baseline document. From there, what do you do with it? Say someone wants 500 copies of a full color brochure. That quantity fits a digital press (or color laser in this case) for run length and C.P.U. Great, so you run it and the customer is happy. Now they want 5,000. That's not in the digital sweet spot. That's in the sweet spot for your small format press. So you run it and now it looks different, substantially different. What's up with that? The proof didn't match the press, which definately doesn't match the color laser device. How can that be? Did you employ any sort of color mangement? No? Well there you go. What can you use to manage the color? Throw a color server in the mix? What's that do with your workflow?
What if your digital hub could do all this? Normalize to a common file format, PDF, then repurpose that PDF for N number of different output "intents". That would be pretty powerful. Now imagine that you use ICC profiles for your devices. Are you going to re-color manage the native files? Well that's not very effective or efficient. Why not employ some sort of color management in your hub and let it repurpose the job and its color? So now you have a digital master file that can be moved from device to device and you can maintain color fidelity. Relatively speaking that is. There are limitations of color management and the color of the devices you image on. I mean really, solid plastic toner will be different than the ink in your press. But as a practical matter, the color will be close. Much closer than if you ran without profiles or compensation. It's like the difference with a inkjet and a press. Different, but can be made to match quite well. And that's the idea, or at least part of it. Get a common file format that can be easily ported to N number of different devices. And, with that system you can make color matches more easily attainable.
I have two customers who are doing just this. Everything goes through one system. Once in the system, they can be moved as manufacturing requirements dictate. They can direct it once to a Digimaster or DocuTech and then move it to a sheetfed press or web. Or in the case of color work, from a color Doc12 to a 3535 or 40" press. And then, they can take the job and make it a low res RGB PDF for a soft proof.
It's like a ROOM workflow. But it's not. In a ROOM workflow, you have a standard file fortmat, but it's not necessarily easily "portable", like screened one-bit TIFFs. Great for the press and proofer, but lousy for a color copier or black and white copier. So now you have two workflows. One for press and one for digital printing. Sure, maybe you "descreen" and or combine the separations but is that the best way? That's what makes PDF so attractive for that digital master. It is understood by many different devices and is functional in other applications outside of the printing world. You can't say that for CT/LW or screened one-bit TIFFs. Can you imagine trying to read a CT/LW PDF that is reasonably downloadable? That's going to look like hell and be bulky. Or you could have a screened one-bit TIFF made into a PDF. Possible, entirely possible. Now think of that screened one-bit TIFF being one color of a three color document. Not so easy now. Possible, but not so easy.
Pretty powerful eh? Kind of brings you back to my epiphany entry. I hope this makes sense, I hope it came out of my head well in words.
posted by Matt Beals at Thursday, June 09, 2005
1 comments
