What is halftone screening?

Halftone screening, also sometimes called halftoning, screening or dithering, is a technique to reliably produce optical illusions that fool the eye into seeing tones and colors that are not actually present on the printed matter.

Most printing technologies are not capable of printing a significant number of different levels for any single color. Offset and flexo presses and some inkjet presses can only place ink or no ink. Halftone screening is a method to make it look as if many more levels of gray are visible in the print by laying down ink in some areas and not in others, and using such a small pattern of dots that the individual dots cannot be seen at normal viewing distance.

Conventional screening, for offset and flexo presses, breaks a continuous tone black and white image into a series of dots of varying sizes and places these dots in a rigid grid pattern. Smaller dots give lighter tones and the dot sizes within the grid are increased in size to give progressively darker shades until the dots grow so large that they tile with adjacent dots to form a solid of maximum density (100%). But this approach is mainly because those presses cannot print single pixels or very small groups, and it introduces other challenges, such as moiré between colorants and reduces the amount of detail that can be reproduced.

Most inkjet presses can print even single dots on their own and produce a fairly uniform tone from them. They can therefore use dispersed screens, sometimes called FM or stochastic halftones.

A simple halftone screen
A simple halftone screen.

 

A dispersed screen uses dots that are all (more or less) the same size, but the distance between them is varied to give lighter or darker tones. There is no regular grid placement, in fact the placement is more or less randomized (which is what the word ‘stochastic’ means), but truly random placement leads to a very ‘noisy’ result with uneven tonality, so the placement algorithms are carefully set to avoid this.

Inkjet is being used more and more in labels, packaging, photo finishing and industrial print, all of which often use more than four inks, so the fact that a dispersed screen avoids moiré problems is also very helpful.

Dispersed screening can retain more detail and tonal subtlety than conventional screening can at the same resolution. This makes such screens particularly relevant to single-pass inkjet presses, which tend to have lower resolutions than the imaging methods used on, say, offset lithography. An AM screen at 600 dots per inch (dpi) would be very visible from a reading distance of less than a meter or so, while an FM screen can use dots that are sufficiently small that they produce the optical illusion that there are no dots at all, just smooth tones. Many inkjet presses are now stepping up to 1200dpi, but that’s still lower resolution than a lot of offset and flexo printing.

This blog post has concentrated on binary screening for simplicity. Many inkjet presses can place different amounts of ink at a single location (often described as using different drop sizes or more than one bit per pixel), and therefore require multi-level screening. And inkjet presses often also benefit from halftone patterns that are more structured than FM screens, but that don’t cluster into discrete dots in the same way as AM screens.

 

The above is an excerpt from our latest white paper: How to mitigate artifacts in high-speed inkjet printing. Download the white paper here.

Time for an update on VDP!

Over the last fifteen years variable data in digital printing has grown from “the next big thing” with vast, untapped potential to a commonly used process for delivering all manner of personalized information. VDP is used for everything from credit card bills and bank statements to direct mail postcards and personalized catalogues, from college enrolment packs to Christmas cards and photobooks, from labels to tickets, checks to ID cards.

This huge variety of jobs is created and managed by an equally huge variety of software, from specialist composition tools to general purpose design applications carefully configured for VDP. And they are consumed by workflows involving (or even completely within) the Digital Front End (DFE) for a digital production press, where jobs must be imposed, color managed.

Time, then, to update our popular “Do PDF/VT Right” guide which has had thousands of downloads since it was first published in 2014 not to mention the number of printed copies distributed at trade shows and industry events.

Do PDF/VT Right - How to make problem-free PDF files for variable data printing
Do PDF/VT Right – How to make problem-free PDF files for variable data printing

In addition to a general overhaul there is a new section on the new ISO 21812 standard that allows workflow controls to be added to PDF files, and notes on Harlequin-specific hints, to get even more speed out of your DFE if you are a Harlequin user.

The goal remains the same: to provide a set of actionable recommendations that help you ensure that your jobs don’t slow down the print production workflow … without affecting the visual appearance that you’re trying to achieve. As a side benefit, several of the recommendations set out below will also ensure that your PDF files can be delivered more efficiently on the web and to PDF readers on mobile devices in a cross-media publishing environment.

Some of the recommendations made in this guide are things that a graphic designer can apply quickly and easily, using their current tools. Others are intended more for the software companies building composition tools. If all of us work together we can greatly reduce the chance of that “heart-attack” job; the one that absolutely, positively must be in the post today … but that runs really slowly on the press.

Download your copy here .

PDF Processing Steps – the next evolution in handling technical marks

Best practice in handling jobs containing both real graphic content and ‘technical marks’ has evolved over the last couple of decades. Technical marks include things like cut/die lines, fold lines, dimensions, legends etc in a page description language file (usually PDF these days). Much of the time, especially for pouches, folding carton and corrugated work, they’ll come originally from a CAD file and will have been merged with the graphics.

People will want to interact with the technical marks differently at various stages in the workflow:

  • Your CAD specialists will want to see the technical marks and make sure that they’ve not been changed from the original CAD input.
  • Brand owner approval may not want to see the technical marks, but prepress and production manager approvers will definitely want to see both the technical marks and the graphics together on their monitors, with the ability to make layers visible or invisible at will.
  • In some workflows the technical marks from the PDF may be used to make a physical die, or to drive a laser cutter; in others an original CAD file will be used instead.
  • On a digital press you may wish to print a short run of just the technical marks, or a combination of technical marks and graphics to ensure that finishing is properly registered with the prints.
  • The main print run, whether on a conventional press (flexo, offset, etc) or digital, will obviously include the graphics, but won’t include most of the technical marks. You may want to include the legend on the print as fool-proof identification of that job, but you’ll obviously need to disable printing of any marks that overlap with the live area or bleed, such as cut and fold marks.
  • Occasionally you may wish to do another short run with technical marks after the main print run, to ensure that finishing has not drifted out of register.

So there are a lot of places in the entire process where both technical marks and graphics may need to be turned on or off. How do you do that in your RIP?

Historically, the first method used to include technical marks, originally in PostScript, but now also in PDF, was to specify each kind of technical mark in a ‘technical separation’, encoded as a spot color in the job. Most operators tried to use a name for that spot color that indicated its intent, but there weren’t any standards, so you could end up with ‘Cut’ (or ‘CUT’, ‘cut’ etc), ‘cut-line’, ‘cut line’, ‘cutline’, ‘die’ etc etc. And that’s just thinking about naming in English. The names chosen are usually fairly meaningful to a human operator, but couldn’t be used reliably for automated processing because of the amount of variation.

As a result, many jobs arriving at a converter, at least from outside of that company, must be reviewed, and the spot names replaced, or the prepress and RIP configured to use the names from that job. That manual processing takes time and introduces the potential for errors.

But let’s assume you’ve completed that stage; how do you configure your RIP to achieve what you need with those technical separations?

The most obvious mechanism to turn off some technical marks is to tell the RIP to render the relevant spot colors as their own separations, but then not to image them on the print. It’s a very simple model, which works well as long as the job was constructed correctly, with all of the technical marks set to overprint. When somebody upstream forgot and left a cut or fold line as knockout (which never happens, of course!) you’d get a white line through the real graphics if the technical mark was on top of them.

The next evolution of that would be to configure the RIP to say that the nominated spot separation should never knock out of any other separation. That’s a configuration option in Harlequin RIPs but may not be widely available elsewhere.

Or you could tell the RIP to completely ignore one or more nominated spot colors, so they have no effect at all on any other marks on the page. Again, that’s a configuration option in Harlequin RIPs, and is one of the best ways of managing technical marks that are saved into the PDF file as technical separations.

Alternatively, since technical marks (like many other parts of a label or packaging job) are usually captured in a PDF layer (or optional content group to use the technical term), you can turn those layers on and off. Again, there are rich controls for managing PDF layers in Harlequin RIPs.

But none of these techniques get away from the need to manually check each file and set up prepress and the RIP appropriately for the spot names or layers that have been used for technical marks.

And that’s where the new ISO standard, 19593-1:2018 comes in. It defines “PDF processing Steps”, a mechanism to uniquely identify technical marks in PDF files, along with their intended function, from cutting to folding and creasing, to bleed areas, white and varnish, braille, dimensions, legends etc. It does this by building on the common practice of saving the technical marks in PDF layers, but adds some identification metadata that is not dependent on the vendor, the language or the normal practice of the originator, prepress or pressroom.

So now you can look at a PDF file and see definitively that a layer called ‘cut’ contains cutting lines. The name ‘cut’ is now just a convenience; the real information is in metadata which is completely and reliably computer-readable. In other words, it doesn’t matter if that layer were named ‘Schnittlinie’ or anything else; the manual step of identifying names that someone, somewhere put in the file upstream and figuring out what each one means, is completely eliminated.

We implemented support for PDF Processing Steps into version 12.1r0 of the Harlequin RIP, and have worked with a number of vendors whose products create files with Processing Steps in them (including Hybrid Software, Esko and Callas) to ensure that everything works seamlessly. We also worked through a wide variety of current and probable use cases to ensure that our implementation can address real-world needs. As an example we added the ability to control all graphics on a PDF page that aren’t in Processing Step layers as if they were just another layer.

In practice this means that Harlequin can be configured to deliver pretty much whatever you need, such as:

  • Export all technical marks identified as Cutting, PartialCutting, CuttingCreasing etc to a vector format to drive a cutting machine.
  • Render and print all technical marks, but none of the real graphics, for checking registration.
  • Render the real graphics, plus dimensions and legend, for the main print run.

    PDF Processing Steps promises the ability to control technical marks without needing to analyze each file and create a different setup for each job.
    PDF Processing Steps promises the ability to control technical marks without needing to analyze each file and create a different setup for each job.

The most important thing that PDF Processing Steps gives us is that you can create a configuration for one of those use cases (or for many other variations) and know that it will work for all jobs that are sent to you using PDF Processing Steps; you won’t need to reconfigure for the next job, just because an operator used different spot names.

Of course, it’ll take a while for everyone to migrate from using spot names to PDF Processing Steps. But I think you’ll agree that the benefits of doing so, in increasing efficiency and reducing the potential for errors, are obvious and significant.

For more information read the press release here.

Choosing the class of your raster image processor (RIP) – Part II

Part II: Factors influencing your choice of integration

If you’re in the process of building a digital front end for your press, you’ll need to consider how much RIPing power you need for the capabilities of the press and the kinds of jobs that will be run on it. The RIP converts text and image data from many file formats including PDF, TIFF™ or JPEG into a format that a printing device such as an inkjet print head, toner marking engine or laser plate-setter can understand. But how do you know what RIP is best for you and what solution can best deliver maximum throughput on your output device? In this second post, Global Graphics Software’s CTO, Martin Bailey, discusses the factors to consider when choosing a RIP.

In my last post I gave a pointer to a spreadsheet that can be used to calculate the data rate required for a digital press. This single number can be used to make a first approximation of which class of RIP integration you should be considering.

For integrations based on the Harlequin RIP® reasonable guidelines are:

  • Up to 250MB/s: can be done with a single RIP using multi-threading in that RIP
  • Up to 1GB/s: use multiple RIPs on a single server using the Harlequin Scalable RIP
  • Over 1GB/s: use multiple RIPs spread over multiple servers using the Harlequin Scalable RIP

These numbers indicate the data rate that the RIP needs to provide when every copy of the output is different. The value may need to be adjusted for other scenarios:

  • If you’re printing the same raster many times, the RIP data rate may be reduced in proportion; the RIP has 100 times as long to process a PDF page if you’re going to be printing 100 copies of it, for instance.
  • If you’re printing variable data print jobs with significant re-use of graphical elements between copies, then Harlequin VariData™ can be used to accelerate processing. This effect is already factored into the recommendations above.

The complexity of the jobs you’re rendering will also have an impact.

Transactional or industrial labelling jobs, for example, tend to be very simple, with virtually no live PDF transparency and relatively low image coverage. They are therefore typically fast to render. If your data rate calculation puts you just above a threshold in the list above, you may be able to take one step down to a simpler system.

On the other hand, jobs such as complex marketing designs or photobooks are very image-heavy and tend to use a lot of live transparency. If your data rate is just below a threshold on the list above, you will probably need to step up to a higher level of system.

But be careful when making those adjustments, however. If you do so you may have to choose either to build and support multiple variations of your DFE, to support different classes of print site, or to design a single model of DFE that can cope with the needs of the great majority of your customers. Building a single model certainly reduces development, test and support costs, and may reduce your average bill of materials. But doing that also tends to mean that you will need to base your design on the raw, “every copy different”, data rate requirements, because somebody, somewhere will expect to be able to use your press to do just that.

Our experience has also been that the complexity of jobs in any particular sector is increasing over time, and the run lengths that people will want to print are shortening. Designing for current expectations may give you an under-powered solution in a few years’ time, maybe even by the time you ship your first digital press. Moore’s law, that computers will continue to deliver higher and higher performance at about the same price point, will cancel out some of that effect, but usually not all of it.

And if your next press will print with more inks, at a higher resolution, and at higher speed you may be surprised at how much impact that combination will have on the data rate requirements, and therefore possibly on the whole architecture of the Digital Front End to drive it.

And finally, the recommendations above implicitly assume that a suitable computer configuration is used. You won’t achieve 1GB/s output from multiple RIPs on a computer with a single, four-core CPU, for example. Key aspects of hardware affecting speed are: number of cores, CPU clock speed, disk space available, RAM available, disk read and write speed, band-width to memory, L2 and L3 cache sizes on the CPU and (especially for multi-server configurations) network speed and bandwidth.

Fortunately, the latest version of the Harlequin RIP offers a framework that can help you to meet all these requirements. It offers a complete scale of solutions from a single RIP through multiple RIPs on a single server, up to multiple RIPs across multiple servers.

 

The above is an excerpt from our latest white paper: Scalable performance with the Harlequin RIP. Download the white paper here.

Read Part I – Calculating data rates here.

Choosing the class of your raster image processor (RIP) – Part I

Part I: How to calculate data rates

If you’re in the process of choosing or building a digital front end for your press, you’ll need to consider how much RIPing power you need for the capabilities of the press and the kinds of jobs that will be run on it. The RIP converts text and image data from many file formats including PDF, TIFF™ or JPEG into a format that a printing device such as an inkjet printhead, toner marking engine or laser platesetter can understand. But how do you know what RIP is best for you and what solution can best deliver maximum throughout on your output device? This is the first of two posts by Global Graphics Software’s CTO, Martin Bailey, where he advises how to size a solution for a digital press using the data rate required on the output side.

Over the years at Global Graphics Software, we’ve found that the best guidance we can give to our OEM partners in sizing digital press systems based on our own solution, the Harlequin RIP®, comes from a relatively simple calculation of the data rate required on the output side. And now we’re making a tool to calculate those data rates available to you. All you need to do is to download it from the web and to open it in Excel.

Download it here:  Global_Graphics_Software_Press_data_rates

You will, of course, also need the specifications of the press(es) that you want to calculate data rates for.

You can use the spreadsheet to calculate data rates based on pages per minute, web speed, sheets or square meters per minute or per hour, or on head frequency. Which is most appropriate for you depends on which market sector you’re selling your press into and where your focus is on the technical aspects of the press.

It calculates the data rate for delivering unscreened 8 bits per pixel (contone) rasters. This has proven to be a better metric for estimating RIP requirements than taking the bit depth of halftoned raster delivery into account. In practice Harlequin will run at about the same speed for 8-bit contone and for 1-bit halftone output because the extra work of halftoning is offset by the reduced volume of raster data to move around. Multi-level halftones delivered in 2-bit or 4-bit rasters take a little bit longer, but not enough to need to be considered here.

You can also use the sheet-fed calculation for conventional print platesetters if you so desire. You might find it eye-opening to compare data rate requirements for an offset or flexo platesetter with those for a typical digital press!

Fortunately, the latest version of the Harlequin RIP offers a framework that can help you to meet all these requirements. It offers a complete scale of solutions from a single RIP through multiple RIPs on a single server, up to multiple RIPs across multiple servers.

In my next post I’ll share how the data rate number can be used to make a first approximation of which class of RIP integration you should be considering.

 

The above is an excerpt from our latest white paper: Scalable performance with the Harlequin RIP®. Download the white paper here

What does a RIP do?

Ever wondered what a raster image processor or RIP does? And what does RIPing a page mean? Read on to learn more about the phases of a RIP, the engine at the heart of your Digital Front End.

The RIP converts text and image data from many file formats including PDF, TIFF™ or JPEG into a format that a printing device such as an inkjet print head, toner marking engine or laser platesetter can understand. The process of RIPing a page requires several steps to be performed in order, regardless of whether that page is submitted as PostScript, PDF or any other page description language.

Interpreting: the page description language to be RIPed is read and decoded into an internal database of graphical elements that must be placed on the page. Each may be an image, a character of text (including font, size, color etc), a fill or stroke etc. This database is referred to as a display list.

Compositing: The display list is pre-processed to apply any live transparency that may be in the job. This phase is only required for any pages in PDF and XPS jobs that use live transparency; it’s not required for PostScript language pages because those cannot include live transparency.

Rendering: The display list is processed to convert every graphical element into the appropriate pattern of pixels to form the output raster. The term ‘rendering’ is sometimes used specifically for this part of the overall processing, and sometimes to describe the whole of the RIPing process. It’s only used it in the first sense in this document.

Output: the raster produced by the rendering process is sent to the marking engine in the output device, whether it’s exposing a plate, a drum for marking with toner, an inkjet head or any other technology.

Sometimes this step is completely decoupled from the RIP, perhaps because plate images are stored as TIFF files and then sent to a CTP platesetter later, or because a near-line or off-line RIP is used for a digital press. In other environments the output stage is tightly coupled with rendering.

RIPing often includes a number of additional processes; in the Harlequin RIP® for example:

  • In-RIP imposition is performed during interpretation
  • Color management (Harlequin ColorPro®) and calibration are applied during interpretation or compositing, depending on configuration and job content
  • Screening is applied during rendering or after the Harlequin RIP has delivered unscreened raster data if screening is being applied post- RIP, when Global Graphics’ ScreenPro™ and PrintFlat™ technologies are being used, for example.

These are all important processes in many print workflows.

 

The Harlequin Host Renderer
The Harlequin RIP includes native interpretation of PostScript, EPS, DCS, XPS, JPEG, BMP and TIFF as well as PDF, PDF/X and PDF/VT, so whatever workflows your target market uses, it gives accurate and predictable image output time after time.

 

The above is an excerpt from our latest white paper: Scalability with the Harlequin RIP®. Download the white paper here

Adjusting rendering of outlined text in Harlequin

By Martin Bailey, CTO, Global Graphics Software

In several sectors of the print market it is common practice to convert text to outlines upstream of a RIP, on the grounds that it’s then impossible for the wrong glyph to be printed. This is normal, for instance, in much of the label and packaging industry, especially when there is very robust regulation in place, such as in pharmaceuticals.

Every page description language defines “scan conversion” rules that specify which pixels should be marked when a graphic is painted onto a page; these build on the concept of “pixel touching”, specifying exactly when a vector shape counts as touching a pixel and therefore marking it.

When you’re using PDF (or PostScript, before that) the scan conversion rules are different for text specified using live fonts and for vector shapes. If you started with live text and then converted it to outlines then you have switched from using the text scan conversion rules to using the vector graphic rules. That has always meant that text converted to outlines tends to render slightly heavier than text using live fonts. And the smaller the text is, the more the weight difference becomes apparent.

FIG 1
FIG 1 – 2pt text in Times Roman showing various scan conversion rules.

In Fig 1 you can see this difference very clearly for very small Western text rendered at 2pt and 600dpi, still a common resolution for digital printers and presses. The top line shows text using live fonts, and the second line shows the PDF scan conversion rule for a vector fill. Note that at 2pt the RIP only has about 12 pixels for the height of an upper-case glyph.

In early 2018 we added a new scan conversion rule for vector fills alongside our pre-existing rules in the Harlequin RIP. The intention was to make it possible to emulate the much lighter output that Esko’s FlexRIPs produce. Unfortunately, it also tended to emulate the ability for very fine structures, especially fine horizontal strokes in small text, to disappear. You can see this in the third row of text in Fig 1.

This is obviously not an optimal solution, so we continued our development, and have now extended the original solution with what is called “dropout control”. This prevents very fine sections of a vector fill “dropping out” when they manage to fall on the page in such a way that they don’t cross the locations in the pixels that would trigger anything being marked. You can see the effect of this in the bottom line in Fig 1.

Light rendering with dropout control was delivered to our OEM partners in late 2018 under the name RenderAccurate.

Even this optimized output won’t exactly match the output of live fonts, because the fonts themselves often include hints to the rendering engine, designed to ensure maximum legibility and conformance to the font designer’s vision. These hints can, for instance, ensure that vertical stems are the same width in all glyphs, or that the curved base of a glyph will extend slightly below the baseline to make it visually balance with glyphs with flat bases that sit on the baseline. Those hints were discarded when the text was converted to an outline, and so can’t be used any more. But the new scan conversion algorithm certainly strikes a good balance between matching the weight of live fonts and maintaining legibility.

The effect is visible in very small text in Latin fonts, as shown in Fig 1, but the impact is often masked by the physical effects of printing. And Latin glyphs tend to be relatively simple, so that the human eye and brain are pretty good at filling in the missing segments without too much impact on legibility or comprehension.

On the other hand, Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) fonts are often more complex, with the result that the effect is visible at larger point sizes. And the meaning can be obscured or altered much more easily if strokes are missing. Fig 2 illustrates the same effects on Japanese text at 3pt, rendered at 600dpi. At this size and resolution, the RIP has about 22 pixels for the height of each glyph.

FIG 2
FIG 2 – 3pt text in MS Mincho, showing, from top to bottom: live fonts; default rendering for outlined text; the new, lighter, outlined text; and lighter text with dropout control.

The glyphs shown in FIG 2 are complex compared to Western scripts, but any solution that will be used with CJK scripts must obviously also be proven with the most complex character shapes, such as the Kanji in FIG 3. Some of these have so many horizontal strokes that they simply cannot be rendered with fewer than 22 device pixels vertically and require more than that for reliable rendering. The sample in this figure is rendered at with around 27 pixels for the height of each glyph.

FIG 3
FIG 3 – More complex Kanji in KozGoPro-Regular, showing, from top to bottom: live fonts; default rendering for outlined text; and the new, lighter text with dropout control.

This article has deliberately used very small text sizes as examples, simply because the effects are easier to see. But the same issues arise at larger sizes as well, albeit more rarely.

On the other hand, it is precisely because the issue appears more rarely, and because the effects are less immediately noticeable, that makes the risk of dropping strokes so dangerous. It’s perfectly possible that an occasional missing stroke, perhaps in an unusually light font, may go unnoticed in process control. And that might result in a print that disappoints a brand owner, or even that fails a regulatory check, after the label has been applied or the carton converted and filled, or even after the product being shipped.

So, when a brand demands lighter rendering of pre-outlined fonts, make sure you’re safe by also using dropout control in your RIP!

New to inkjet? Come and see us at Hunkeler Innovationdays

Martin Bailey, CTO, Global Graphics Software
Martin Bailey, CTO, Global Graphics Software

If you are new to inkjet and are building your first press no doubt you’ll have many questions about the workflow and the Digital Front End.

In fact, you’re probably wondering how to scope out the functionality you need to create a DFE that is customised to exactly what your customers require. Among your concerns will be how you’re going to achieve the throughput you need to keep the press running at rated speed, especially when handling variable data. Or it might be handling special colours or achieving acceptable image quality that is keeping you awake at night.  And how to achieve this without increasing the bill of materials for your press?

At Hunkeler Innovationdays we’ll have a range of resources available to address just such questions with some real case study examples of how our OEM customers have solved the problems that were causing them a headache using our technology and the skills of our Technical Services team.

For instance, how, on a personalised run, when every label or page might be different, can you stop the press from falling idle whilst the RIP catches up?  Our ScreenPro™ technology helps Mark Andy cut processing time by 50% on the Mark Andy Digital Series HD, enabling fully variable (every label is different) continuous printing at high-speed and at high-quality.

How can you avoid streaking on the image if your substrate is racing under your printheads at speeds of up to 300m/min for aqueous and maybe 90m/min for UV.  Or mottling? The Mirror and Pearl Advanced Inkjet Screens™ available with ScreenPro have been developed specifically to address these problems.

During the lifetime of the press, how can you avoid variations in quality that look like banding because your printheads have worn or been replaced?  Take a look at what Ellerhold AG has achieved by deploying PrintFlat™.

The ScreenPro screening engine is one of the building blocks you’ll need for your inkjet press. Our Fundamentals components provide other functions that are essential to the workflow such as job management, soft proofing, and colour management.

Using a variety of white papers, print samples, video footage and case studies , we’ll be sharing our experience.  So, come along and meet the team:  that’s me, Jeremy Spencer, Justin Bailey and our colleague Jonathan Wilson from Meteor Inkjet if you want to chat about their printhead driver electronics that are endorsed by the world’s leading industrial inkjet printhead manufacturers.

 

Join us at Hunkeler Innovationdays 2019

 

Simple VDP support

VDP is a topic that has the potential to get people very excited. We are no exception. For instance we were delighted when Mark Andy told us that our technology reduces process and RIP times on the Digital Series HD by 50% even with full color, every-page-different.

Confident of the benefits print shops would experience if they could take on higher premium personalised jobs, we made sure from the early days, that our technology would be a) able to handle variable data in “regular” flavour PDFs by intelligent rendering b) be PDF/VT compliant (since IPEX 2010) and capable of high-speeds without sacrificing quality. And now there’s a new development that we’ve introduced this year with the launch of Version 12 of the Harlequin Host Renderer in April 2018.

What about when your VDP workflow doesn’t really benefit from PDF/VT but needs a lighter weight solution for adding text, graphics and barcodes?
Harlequin Host Renderer 12 now supports Dynamic Overlays for these use cases. Some applications such as packaging, labels and industrial print, require a simple form of VDP support. This might be where a single background page is combined with overlay graphics that are selected on the basis of a data file supplied in a format like CSV. Serial and batch codes can be added using dynamic counters without writing values to a CSV first. Support has been added to apply overlays on top of a single page PDF file to add simple serial numbers on labels or QR codes for personalized URLs, postal barcodes and addresses on envelopes.

Secure tickets

This secure ticket is generated with in-RIP bar-code support where data is read dynamically from a CSV file.

The example shows:

  •  A complex guilloche pattern in the background
  • Two lines of micro text identifying the recipient by name
  • A QR Code encoding a personalized URL (PURL)
  • The Global Graphics ‘g’ is painted in the centre of the QR Code
  • A six-character code in which each character is drawn with one of six different colours

Folding cartons

The background for this image comprises three folding cartons using nested imposition.

The overlay includes:

  • The first name of the recipient in large white text with a silver border
  • The full name of the recipient together with their city and state
  • A line of microtext showing their full name repeated to fill the space available
  • A QR Code recording a personalized URL (PURL), with a Global Graphics logo placed over the centre of it
  • The flag for the state of the recipient

 

 

 

 

 

 

Avoiding the orange peel

When you speak frequently at industry events as I do, you can tell what resonates with your audience. So, it was very gratifying to experience the collective nodding of heads at the Inkjet Conference in Neuss, Dusseldorf this week.

I gave an on update mitigating texture artifacts on inkjet presses using halftone screens.

You see, it turns out that there is more commonality between inkjet presses than we previously thought. I’m not saying that there is no need for a custom approach, because there will always be presses with specific characteristics that will need addressing through services like our BreakThrough engineering service.

What I am saying is that we’ve discovered that what matters most is the media. And it gives rise to two distinct types of behavior.

On reasonably absorbent and/or wettable media drops tend to coalesce on the substrate surface in the direction of the substrate, causing visible streaking especially in mid and three-quarter tones. These issues are amenable to correction in a half tone.

Whereas on non-absorbent, poorly wettable media such as flexible plastics or metal, prints are characterized by a mottle effect that looks a bit like orange peel. 

This effect seems to be triggered by ink shrinkage during cure. This can be corrected with a halftone with specially designed characteristics. We have one in test on real presses at the moment.

So it won’t be long now before we introduce two advanced screens for inkjet that will greatly improve quality on the majority of inkjet presses. One to counteract streaking. The other to counteract the orange peel effect. And the next project is to address non-uniformity across the web. Fixing that in software gives you the granularity to address every nozzle separately on any head/ electronics.

And for those presses aforementioned with unique properties that need special tuning? Our Chameleon design tools can create unique halftones for these cases.

I do like it when a good plan comes together!