System and method for performing color previewing operations

Abstract

Methods and systems for performing color previewing operations. Printer configurations are compared to convert a digital original design having color values and color profiles, each configuration being associated with a printer, a substrate, and a colorant set, and includes a printer-specific, substrate-specific color profile and a rule set that uses the color profile to convert any digital original design into the printer configuration. For all colors in the design, the design is converted according to each printer configuration, and each converted color output is predicted in the selected device-independent color space. The predicted color output is compared to a comparative color output defined by the original picture color values expressed in the selected device independent color space. A predetermined metric is used to identify and report portions that exceed the tolerance. A contrast image is generated and displayed, portions beyond the tolerance are highlighted, and / or an acceptable and / or optimal printer configuration is automatically selected.

Description

[0001] CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

[0002] This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 63 / 323,805, filed on March 25, 2022, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PERFORMING A COLOR PREFLIGHT OPERATION,” which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Background Art

[0003] The cost and productivity of a printing press is affected by how much colorant (ink) is used. Using relatively more colorant generally results in being able to reproduce a relatively larger gamut of colors, but generally also involves higher costs and, at least on some printing presses, lower printing speeds. In general, lower printing speeds result in lower productivity for the printing press and may lead to inefficient use of the printing press. For example, on Printing with four inks instead of six on an Indigo digital press costs 33% less and can result in a 33% faster process. The difference in cost and productivity between using a digital press (such as an inkjet or xerographic press) and a non-digital press (such as a flexographic, offset or gravure press that requires the creation and use of a specific plate for each color separation) can also be affected by the number of colors used and the overall color gamut required, as well as the number of prints of the intended design.

[0004] The optimal colorant set is influenced by the artwork design and acceptable color tolerances. Early identification of the colorant set is desirable for accurate estimation and work planning. In contrast, determining the optimal colorant set at the press may delay the creation of a "ready plate" and reduce overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) / productivity.

[0005] The following terms are used throughout this application:

[0006] Color Space: A definition of a format for storing color data. Non-limiting examples include RGB, CMYK, and Lab (discussed in more detail below). For example, the RGB color space defines that each color consists of 3 components, where the first component represents red (R), the second component represents green (G), and the third component represents blue (B). Similarly, CMYK includes four components: cyan (C), magenta (M), yellow (Y), and black (B). CMYKOGV includes additional components for orange (O), green (G), and violet (V).

[0007] Color values ​​or ink densities: Actual values ​​as defined using the selected color space. So, for example, 50% Cyan, 50% Magenta, 0% Yellow and 0% Black are color values ​​defined in the CMYK color space, which define a slightly purple color.

[0008] Device-dependent color space: A color space in which each color value corresponds to a component used by a device to process and output color (e.g., the ink used by a printing press or the color of a pixel used by a display). Examples include the RGB and CMYK color spaces. Color values ​​defined in a device-dependent color space do not uniquely identify a color, because printing a color with different printers or displaying it with different displays will generally result in similar but different colors being printed or displayed, based on the characteristics of the device, the colorants used, and the substrate (for printed output).

[0009] Device-independent color space: A color space in which each set of color values ​​defines a unique color that always appears exactly the same to the human eye. An example is the Lab color space.

[0010] The printing field requires devices that can display / print / scan colors using device-dependent color spaces, as well as the need to define each unique color in an absolute manner by using device-independent color spaces. To overcome the mismatch between device-dependent and device-independent color spaces, color profiles are used to convert color values ​​in device-dependent color spaces to color values ​​in device-independent color spaces, and vice versa.

[0011] Deviations in color matching are often expressed as a value for Delta-E, which is a representation of the difference between a printed color and the original color standard of the input content. A relatively low Delta-E value corresponds to a relatively high degree of accuracy in the color match, while a relatively high Delta-E value indicates a relatively large mismatch. Color is often measured in three dimensions using a spectrophotometer in a device-independent color space (sometimes also referred to as a "color model" or "color scale"), such as, but not limited to, the L*, a*, and b* color spaces, as discussed in more detail below. To calculate the Delta-E variance from the produced color to the target, the variance is measured along each axis (e.g., the variance between the printed color and the design color), and in the most basic exemplary equation described below as shown in Equation 1, the variance is squared, the squares are summed, and the square root of the sum gives the Delta-E variance.

[0012] Delta-E = [(L*2-L*1) 2 +(a*2+a*1) 2 +(b*2-b*1) 2 ] 1 / 2 (1)

[0013] The above equation is sometimes referred to as CIE76, indicating the year it was developed (1976). However, over time, in an attempt to improve the relationship between the calculated results and actual human perception, more complex formulas have evolved for Delta-E. Such more complex formulas are known to those skilled in the art as CIE94 (developed in 1994) and CIEDE2000 (developed in 2000). Other equations are known for use in different color spaces, such as the CMC l:c (1984) equation for Delta-E, which is expressed using the L*C*h color space. Another Lab color space includes the Hunter L, a, b color space. Therefore, any reference to Delta-E in this application is not limited to the use of any particular formula. Likewise, although the L*a*b* color space is primarily referenced herein as an exemplary device-independent color space, the present invention is not limited to the use of any particular color space.

[0014] Current solutions on the market include Color Preview (ECP) software predicts the maximum color impact of a given design, but limitations in true color deviation assessment may cause suboptimal predictions and may miss opportunities to improve OEE. Current ECP software provides simulated metrics for some key colors from the design, but not all colors. Specifically, ECP software uses the spectral color information of the input ink and compares it with the best match result (i.e., the press profile) for the output color space. However, because current ECP solutions limit this check of spectral color information to "pure" ink colors (colors that are not mixed with other colors), the output is a theoretical approach and does not take into account ink colors that are used only as hues (mixed with different colors), for which exceeding the color gamut causes less visual damage than in pure color areas. Therefore, current ECP output does not take into account color deviations that may only exist in a very small part of the graphic, which causes little to no visual damage.

[0015] To compensate for the problems associated with accurately predicting color deviations, print shops may rely solely on simple rules, rely on experts, or wait for the press to decide. Following only simple rules may result in a print job being produced with more ink than is truly necessary - due to an overestimation of Delta-E in the tonal area. Relying on experts is often expensive, subjective, and may introduce additional delays to the printing process. Waiting for the press to decide has the disadvantages discussed above. For all of the above reasons, there is a need in the art for better tools to help print shops evaluate the color deviations associated with various ink sets and choose among multiple alternatives. Summary of the invention

[0016] One aspect of the present invention relates to a computer-implemented method for performing a color preflight operation. The method includes providing, with a computer, a subject digital artwork design having a first set of color values, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and a color reproduction tolerance, and providing, with a computer, more than two press configurations. Each press configuration is associated with a press, a substrate, and a set of colorants, and includes a press-specific, substrate-specific color profile and a rule set for automatically converting any digital artwork design to the press configuration using the press-specific, substrate-specific color profile. The method includes, with a computer, for all colors in the subject digital artwork design, converting the subject digital artwork design according to a corresponding rule set for each of a plurality of press configurations, and predicting a color output associated with each conversion corresponding to each press configuration. Each color output defines a set of converted color values ​​specific to the press configuration expressed in a selected device-independent color space. Using the computer, comparing the predicted color output associated with each conversion with a comparison color output defined by the first set of color values, the first set of color values ​​being mapped to or otherwise expressed in the selected device-independent color space. Any portions of the predicted color output that are outside of tolerance are identified, and a metric, such as Delta-E, that defines the relative amount by which the predicted color output is outside of tolerance is reported.

[0017] The method further includes one or more of the following options. In a first option, the method includes, for one or more selected transformations, generating and displaying a comparison image, the comparison image including an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design, the image having a highlight corresponding to each portion of the predicted color output that is out of tolerance. In a second option, the method includes automatically identifying, with a computer, one or more acceptable press configurations based on a first set of predetermined criteria, or automatically providing an alert indicating that none of the press configurations are acceptable, and optionally, automatically selecting a best press configuration from the acceptable press configurations based on a second set of predetermined criteria.

[0018] In an embodiment, more than two press configurations may include at least one digital press configuration and at least one non-digital press configuration, or all of the more than two press configurations may include digital press configurations. More than two press configurations may include at least one configuration for a substrate that is different from at least one other configuration. More than two press configurations may include at least one configuration having a colorant set that has fewer colorants than at least one other configuration in the plurality of press configurations, such as, but not limited to, two or more of: at least one configuration having 3 colorants, at least one configuration having 4 colorants, at least one configuration having 5 colorants, at least one configuration having 6 colorants, and at least one configuration having 7 colorants.

[0019] Providing color reproduction tolerances may include identifying at least one first portion of the digital artwork design having a different tolerance than at least one second portion of the digital artwork. The portions having different tolerances may, for example, be identified as objects or bounded areas of the digital artwork design.

[0020] The metric defining the relative amount by which the predicted color output associated with each transformation is outside of tolerance may include a total area value outside of tolerance. The method may include identifying one or more of a plurality of press configurations having a minimum total area value outside of tolerance. The total area value outside of tolerance may be expressed as a percentage of a total area of ​​the digital artwork design, as a square of a dimensional unit, or a combination thereof.

[0021] Comparing the predicted color output associated with each transformation to the subject digital artwork design may include calculating a delta E for each portion of the predicted color output. Embodiments may include receiving a user inputted tolerance change, and redisplaying the color managed image, modifying the highlighting of each portion that is out of tolerance, and modifying a metric defining the relative amount of out of tolerance for the user inputted tolerance change. The user inputted tolerance change may be received via a graphical user interface including a slider operable between a relatively lower value and a relatively higher value, a displayed numerical tolerance value modifiable by inputting a different numerical value, or a combination thereof.

[0022] The comparison image may include a first color relative to the actual color of the subject digital artwork design in the area within the tolerance and a second false coloring for highlighting. The highlighting of each portion that exceeds the tolerance may be defined by a highlight window, which may be the actual color or a third false coloring that is perceptually different from the second false coloring. The highlighting of each portion that exceeds the tolerance may be provided with a color that is complementary or contrasting to the actual color of the subject digital artwork design or with a color selected by the user. The first false coloring may be darker or lighter than the actual color.

[0023] The method may include calculating a maximum Delta-E and an average Delta-E for the out-of-tolerance area for each printer configuration, such as identifying acceptable maximum values ​​for the maximum Delta-E, average Delta-E, and total out-of-tolerance area, and comparatively reporting the maximum Delta-E, average Delta-E, and total out-of-tolerance area for multiple printer configurations relative to the acceptable maximum values. The method may further include identifying colorants in a colorant set having at least one printer configuration having a maximum Delta-E, average Delta-E, and total out-of-tolerance area that is less than the corresponding identified acceptable maximum values. The method may include providing a list of one or more printer configurations by name in a user interface, with corresponding maximum Delta-E, average Delta-E, and total out-of-tolerance area values ​​associated with each printer configuration listed in the user interface.

[0024] More generally, the method may include defining a maximum value, an average value, a total value, or a combination thereof for a metric defining a relative amount of predicted color output. Identifying one or more acceptable press configurations using a first predetermined set of criteria may include defining an acceptable press configuration as a press configuration having a maximum value, an average value, and a total value that is less than an acceptable maximum value identified for each of the maximum value, the average value, and the total value of the metric defining the relative amount of predicted color output. Selecting an optimal press configuration from the one or more acceptable press configurations using a second set of criteria may include defining the optimal press configuration as a press configuration having: (a) a minimum amount of colorant compared to any other press configuration in the one or more acceptable press configurations; (b) a minimum amount of out-of-tolerance area in a portion of the digital artwork design identified as being more critical than another portion of the digital artwork design; or (c), a combination of (a) and (b). Embodiments may include further including providing a cost estimate associated with each press configuration and ranking the press configurations according to cost, wherein the second predetermined set of criteria for selecting the optimal press configuration defines the optimal press configuration as the configuration having the most cost-effectiveness.

[0025] Another aspect of the present invention relates to a system for performing a color preflight operation, the system comprising a computer processor, one or more input devices operable to provide input to the computer processor, a computer display operable to display a visual image according to commands executed by the computer processor, and a computer storage medium. The computer storage medium is programmed with instructions for receiving, via the one or more input devices, storing in the computer storage medium, and / or retrieving from a computer memory a subject digital artwork design having a first set of color values, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and a color reproduction tolerance. The medium is further programmed with instructions for receiving, via the one or more input devices, storing in the computer storage medium, and / or retrieving from a computer memory two or more press configurations, each press configuration being associated with a press, a substrate, and a colorant set, and comprising a press-specific, substrate-specific color profile and a rule set for automatically converting any digital artwork design to the press configuration using the press-specific, substrate-specific color profile. The programming instructions further include instructions for, with a computer processor, transforming the subject digital artwork design according to a corresponding set of rules for each of a plurality of printing press configurations for all colors in the subject digital artwork design; predicting, with the computer processor, a color output associated with each transformation corresponding to each printing press configuration (each color output defining a set of transformed color values ​​specific to the printing press configuration expressed in a selected device-independent color space); and comparing, with the computer processor, the predicted color output associated with each transformation with a comparison color output defined by a first set of color values ​​mapped to or otherwise expressed in the selected device-independent color space, identifying any portion of the predicted color output that is outside of tolerance, and reporting a metric defining the relative amount by which the predicted color output is outside of tolerance. The medium further includes at least one of: programming instructions for generating, with a computer processor, and displaying on a display, for one or more selected conversions, a comparison image comprising an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design, the image having highlights corresponding to each portion of the predicted color output of the design that is out of tolerance; or programming instructions for automatically identifying, with a computer, one or more acceptable press configurations or automatically providing an alert indicating that none of the press configurations are acceptable based on a first predetermined set of criteria, and, optionally, automatically selecting, from the acceptable press configurations, a best press configuration based on a second predetermined set of criteria.

[0026] The system processor may be further configured to automatically identify one or more acceptable press configurations, each of which has a maximum, average, total, or combination thereof of a metric for defining a relative amount of predicted color output, the maximum, average, and total being less than an acceptable maximum identified for the corresponding value. The process may be further configured to automatically select an optimal press configuration from the one or more acceptable press configurations, wherein the optimal press configuration has (a) the least amount of colorant compared to any other of the one or more acceptable press configurations; (b) the least amount of out-of-tolerance area in a portion of the digital artwork design identified as more critical than another portion of the digital artwork design; or (c) a combination of (a) and (b). An embodiment of the system may include a processor configured to provide a cost estimate associated with each press configuration and to rank the press configurations according to cost, wherein a second predetermined set of criteria for selecting the optimal press configuration defines the optimal press configuration as the configuration with the greatest cost-effectiveness.

[0027] Yet another aspect of the present invention relates to a non-transitory computer storage medium programmed with machine-readable instructions for causing a computer processor to perform color preview operations in accordance with the instructions described with respect to the above-described system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0028] The patent or application document or priority application document and any national phase application thereof for which color is permitted contains or will contain at least one drawing executed in color. Where applicable, the Office will provide copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawings (or drawings) upon request and payment of the necessary fee. The colors described herein are for illustration only and correspond to shades of gray in the corresponding grayscale drawings. Figure 2 , 3 , 7 (and similar Figure 4 The contents (e.g., text, graphics, colors) in the embodiments of the present invention are exemplary and are used for illustration only and do not form part of the present invention.

[0029] Figure 1 is a flow chart depicting an exemplary method according to one aspect of the present invention.

[0030] Figure 2 An exemplary digital artwork design is depicted, including colored areas that are primarily shades of green and yellow.

[0031] Figure 3 An exemplary comparison image is depicted showing relatively dark tones for portions of an image that are not out of tolerance, a highlighted window having a relatively light tone, and out of tolerance areas that are red or orange relative to the expected color of the image portion, which is typically green.

[0032] Figure 4 An exemplary user interface display is depicted.

[0033] Figure 5 An exemplary portion of a user interface for receiving user input of a tolerance is depicted.

[0034] Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary system according to one aspect of the present invention.

[0035] Figure 7 An exemplary comparison image is depicted showing relatively light hues for portions of the image that are within tolerance and out-of-tolerance areas that are blue, relative to the expected color of the image portion, which is generally green.

[0036] Figure 8 is a schematic diagram illustrating the conversion and comparison steps as described herein. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0037] Now with reference to the drawings, one aspect of the present invention relates to Figure 1 , for performing a color preview operation. The method includes, in step 110, providing a subject digital artwork design, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and color reproduction tolerances. As is known in the art, a color profile is a characterization of a device that converts values ​​from a device-dependent color space (typically RGB and CMYK) to a device-independent color space (such as, but not limited to, L*a*b*). The color profile provided in this step may be a device-dependent color profile, such as a profile for use in printing on a specific printing press known to be used by the artwork designer, or it may be a device-independent profile, such as a standardized CMYK or standardized RGB profile, or may be a device-independent profile (such as L*a*b*). For example, Figure 2 The design 200 depicted in the figure may be a subject digital artwork design to be printed on a substrate. Given the color information for each area of ​​the design, a color profile may include information sufficient to fully describe the intended output, provided in a standard such as CMYK, RGB, sRGB, or L*a*b* without limitation.

[0038] Step 120 includes providing multiple, preferably more than two, printing press configurations. Each printing press configuration is associated with a specific printing press, substrate and colorant set, and includes substrate-related color profile information associated with a specific printing press of a specific substrate, and a rule set for automatically converting any design into the configuration. For example, an exemplary such rule set can define a conversion such as that performed by a color management module (CMM) to match a design color profile with a printing color profile. A more complex rule set can describe how some elements of the original design are converted differently from other elements (e.g., different rules for text relative to images). The color profile information is sufficient to predict how to reproduce colors using colorants in the colorant set - in particular, including details of the relative amount of each colorant that will be used to create each color. In some embodiments, all printing press configurations can be digital printing press configurations, and in other embodiments, at least one printing press configuration can be associated with a non-digital printing press (e.g., a flexographic printing press requiring the generation of a printing plate).

[0039] Step 130 includes converting the digital artwork design according to a corresponding rule set for all colors in the subject digital artwork design for each of the plurality of press configurations. Unlike prior art solutions, the conversion is performed on all colors in the converted image, rather than only on key colors.

[0040] Step 140 includes predicting the color output associated with each conversion, such as with a color managed image, and in step 150, comparing each predicted color output to the subject digital artwork design (which may also be in the form of a color managed image). The term "color managed image" as used herein corresponds to an image in which each portion of the image has corresponding color information associated with each pixel, and a color profile associated with the image. The prediction step typically involves the use of curves / equations and / or lookup tables. Thus, for example, each pixel in the image may have CMYK color information associated with it, or for vector-based images, each region formed by vector instructions may have color information associated with it. The comparison step may include calculating a delta-E for each portion (e.g., each pixel) of the predicted color image compared to each corresponding portion of the digital artwork design. In essence, the prediction step in 140 includes taking the color values, as converted from the first artwork color value set in step 130, as color values ​​corresponding to the colorants to be used by the printer using the printer-specific color profile on the selected substrate, which are mapped to the selected device-independent color space. The predicted color output of the printing press is then compared to the original artwork color values ​​expressed in or directly converted to the selected device-independent color space.

[0041] Now to Figure 8 For reference, diagram 800 further illustrates the conversion and comparison steps. A color artwork design 810 includes a first color profile that maps color values ​​as expressed in the design to color values ​​in a device-independent color space 870. If the design 810 already has a device-independent color space, the conversion step 820 may not be necessary (or may be required to convert values ​​from one device-independent color space to values ​​in a selected color space 870 for comparison). The color values ​​in the artwork design may first be converted to the color space used by the intended output device, or to a device-independent color space, using the artwork color profile in step 830. The color output of the press configuration is then predicted using a conversion 850 of the values ​​generated in step 830 to values ​​in a device-independent color space 860 in the same color space as the values ​​in 870. In embodiments where the color values ​​in the artwork design are already provided in a device-independent color space, step 830 may not be required. In embodiments where the press configuration is configured to accept values ​​in a device-independent color space 870, application of the press configuration 840 may begin with the values ​​generated in the color space 870. The color values ​​defined in device independent color spaces 860 and 870 are then compared in comparison block 880, which may employ one of the Delta-E comparison formulas as described herein above.

[0042] Step 160 includes generating and displaying a comparison image including an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design with highlights corresponding to each portion of the design that is out of tolerance and reporting a total area value outside of tolerance.

[0043] For example, Figure 3 As shown in FIG. 1 , in one embodiment, the comparison image 300 includes an area within a tolerance range relative to the color managed image (eg, Figure 2 The actual color depicted in the image (as depicted in the image), providing relatively less color-saturated image areas or darkened areas (such as by adding a percentage of black on top of the expected color), such as by using a modified color profile to display non-highlighted portions of the image. This difference in color from the actual color can be described as "false coloring", meaning that it differs from the actual coloring to some degree. Figure 3As depicted in , the first erroneous coloring corresponding to the within-tolerance area 310 essentially includes applying a relatively darker or blacker color profile to the display of the area. The highlighting of each portion that is out of tolerance is bounded by a highlight window 320, and each portion that is out of tolerance can be defined as corresponding to a second erroneous coloring. The image area within the highlight window that is within the tolerance is depicted as being relatively more color saturated (or brighter) in at least one color than the actual coloring of the color managed image (but in other embodiments, it can be the actual coloring). Therefore, as depicted, the relatively brighter colors in the highlight window can be created by applying a relatively brighter color profile to the display portion corresponding to the within-tolerance area inside the highlight window. Each portion that is out of tolerance is provided with a coloring 330 that is complementary or contrasting to the actual coloring in the color managed image. Therefore, as Figure 3 As shown in , in the corresponding area of ​​the subject design image, the highlighted window is relatively more yellow than the light green shaded area, and the out-of-gamut area is shown in a reddish-orange hue rather than the actual color green, and the non-highlighted portion of the image is generally brighter than Figure 2 In other embodiments, the out-of-tolerance highlight coloring may be user defined and may not necessarily be a complementary coloring. In particular, the user defined coloring may be selected as a color that does not exist in the actual image so as not to be confused with the real coloring. In some embodiments, the highlight coloring may be selected by the computer as a coloring that is not one of the real colorings used in the design and is as distinguishable as possible from the closest real coloring in the design. The distance between colorings may be based on the position of the corresponding coloring on a standardized color wheel and the relative distance on the color wheel.

[0044] Figure 7 Another exemplary user interface display showing another exemplary comparison image 700 is illustrated, wherein a majority of the image 710 (not exceeding the tolerance limit) is shown as a whole, such as Figure 2 The actual coloring depicted in FIG. 7 is relatively brighter, and the highlighted area 730 corresponding to the out-of-tolerance area is depicted in blue. The blue color may be user-defined or otherwise selected to stand out against the background hue. The present invention is not limited to any particular highlighting method. Figure 7 As depicted in , there is no highlight window, only a first error coloring (eg, brightening) of the portion of the image within tolerance, and a second error coloring (eg, blue) of the portion of the image that is out of tolerance.

[0045] In some embodiments, the out-of-tolerance coloring can be represented as a heat map, where relatively large out-of-tolerance colors are shown with a different shade or tone of highlight coloring than relatively small out-of-tolerance coloring, and the heat map can include a continuous gradient from "cold" (less out-of-tolerance) to "hot" (more out-of-tolerance) areas, or can have sharp boundaries between a specified range of relatively cool to relatively hot colors. In other embodiments, the highlight coloring can be composed of a single color (e.g., Figure 3 Reddish orange or Figure 7 blue). Figure 5 As shown in the exemplary user interface window 500, the value reported for the total area outside the tolerance is expressed as a percentage of the total area of ​​the digital artwork design 510 (e.g., 2.65% in the European format; 2.65% in the U.S. format) and as a dimension unit square 520 (e.g., 557.13 mm 2 ). It should be understood that the metric used to report the area outside the tolerance can be any metric selected to provide a meaningful output, and can be user-selected from a number of options. The units can be expressed in any unit of measurement, and can be user-selectable between unit conventions, and decimal nomenclature can also be selectable between European or US formats.

[0046] The method may include automatically identifying one or more of the plurality of printer configurations having the smallest total area value outside of tolerance, or the plurality of printer configurations may be ranked from smallest to worst according to the total area value outside of tolerance, and several of the highest (smallest value) contenders are displayed in a user interface. In a preferred embodiment, three or more printer configurations are compared, including at least configurations having 3 colorants (e.g., CMY or CMK), 4 colorants (e.g., CMYK), 5 colorants (e.g., CMYK plus any one or OGV), 6 colorants (e.g., CMYK plus any two of OGV), or 7 colorants (e.g., CMYKGOV), but there is no limit to the number of colorants included in the comparison, and the aforementioned color selection is non-limiting. For example, the colorants may include one or more "spot colors," such that one or more specific ink colors are important to a brand associated with certain consumer packaging (e.g., associated with a product supplied on a Printed packaging combined with Coke red TMIn addition, there is no limitation on the type of colorant considered (e.g., the presence or absence of white underprint, gloss overprint, metallics, neons, etc., all of which can be included in the compared configurations). As used herein, the term "colorant" refers to any substance applied by a printing press that has an effect on the color perception of a human viewer, including transparent substances such as "gloss". Configurations using different substrates can also be compared, as can configurations using digital printing presses versus non-digital printing presses.

[0047] The method typically includes generating a report for at least three configurations. In some use operations, the "winning" (i.e., optimal) configuration may be clear and easy to select automatically, especially if the minimum cost, most efficient option is clearly within tolerance (i.e., identified as an acceptable configuration). In such operations, it may not be necessary for the viewer to review the display with highlighting. In other use operations, there may be two or more close candidate press configurations that are automatically identified as acceptable, which may benefit from human review to select the one that is perceived to be the best based on review of the highlighted display. In other operations, the user may want to review where the candidate is out of tolerance in each instance, or there may not be an option that is automatically identified as acceptable, in which case the system may provide an alert requiring human review, or the human user may simply want to review the option selected by the computer before continuing.

[0048] The highlighting in the comparison image provides a metric for the printer to make a subjective determination regarding the affected area outside of gamut and whether the degree to which it is out of gamut is critical to the overall image. The plurality of printer configurations may include at least one configuration whose colorant set has less colorant than at least one other configuration in the plurality of printer configurations. In this way, the impact of different colorant sets can be objectively compared to each other through a metric such as the total area out of tolerance, while still permitting the printer to subjectively consider whether the area out of tolerance is clearly critical.

[0049] In still other embodiments, the evaluation of the relative acceptability of the out-of-tolerance area can be further automated by preselecting certain parts of the image as having higher or lower importance. For example, such identification can include identifying objects such as company logos, or areas defined by user-defined boundaries such as the most important parts of the original image as having higher importance. If such areas are identified, the output can further provide a metric showing whether or how many out-of-tolerance areas are located in critical or non-critical areas, and / or the automated configuration selection can consider these critical areas when selecting a preferred design, wherein the user interface further identifies critical or non-critical areas in a highlighted display. In the context of color tolerance, the consideration of critical areas relative to non-critical areas can be expressed as dynamic delta E (for example, the maximum delta E for the identified object or area can be relatively higher than the remaining area of ​​the original image), and there can be more any number of different areas or objects with different delta E thresholds in the original image. The identification of important areas can be manually identified, or identified by a machine learning algorithm that is trained to identify the key parts of the image based on programmed standards.

[0050] In embodiments where the best configuration is automatically selected from a plurality of acceptable candidates, acceptable candidates may be defined as those with the fewest number of colorants, or those with no or the fewest amount of out-of-tolerance areas within the critical region, or some combination thereof. For designs where both critical regions and minimal colorants are important, the applicability of each of these criteria may be weighted and evaluated as part of an algorithm that may be user defined or defined by machine learning over time.

[0051] like Figure 3 , 4 As shown in Figures 1 and 5, software programmed with instructions for implementing the above methods may include a user interface for visualizing results and inputting. Figure 5As shown in , the user interface can be configured to permit a user to input a change in the tolerance via a graphical user interface that includes a slider 530 operable between a relatively lower value and a relatively higher value, and includes a display field 540 for displaying a numerical tolerance value (e.g., "ΔE2000 threshold: 2.5"). Thus, the user can change the value by moving the slider (e.g., with a mouse or touch screen) or by entering a different numerical value in the associated field. The change in value can then cause all of the aforementioned steps to be repeated for each press configuration, and in particular, display the change relative to the particular configuration currently being displayed by redisplaying the color managed image, modifying the highlighting of each portion that is out of tolerance, and modifying the total area value outside the tolerance for the tolerance change entered by the user. The user interface can provide one or more warnings or information statements, such as Figure 5 , the one or more warning or information statements inform the user that "Only the selected strategy is used to calculate color differences. The document profile has no effect on the simulation." The statement reflects that because the document profile is used both to provide comparison values ​​in a device-independent color space and also to convert document color values ​​to those used when the press profile is applied, any effect of the document profile is offset in subsequent calculations and conversions.

[0052] like Figure 4 As shown in more detail in FIG. 4 , the method may include providing a list 410 of one or more press configurations by name (e.g., “EPM”; “QUADRI”; and “INDICHROMIE”) in the user interface 400. The method may also include calculating and displaying a column 420 of maximum Delta-E (e.g., “3,7” for “EPM”) and a column 430 of average Delta-E (e.g., “3,3” for “EPM”) associated with each press configuration listed in the user interface. The user may set a corresponding maximum value for the maximum Delta-E (e.g., “Max=2”), a corresponding maximum value for the average Delta-E (e.g., “Max=3”), and a corresponding maximum value for the total area value outside of tolerance (e.g., “Max=0.2%) in column 440, and the values ​​associated with each press configuration may be provided with color coding (e.g., green for good and red for bad) to indicate their relationship to the maximum value. For example, as shown in FIG. 4 , the values ​​associated with each press configuration may be provided with color coding (e.g., green for good and red for bad) to indicate their relationship to the maximum value. For example, as shown in FIG. 4 , the user may set a corresponding maximum value for the maximum Delta-E (e.g., “Max=2”), a corresponding maximum value for the average Delta-E (e.g., “Max=3”), and a corresponding maximum value for the total area value outside of tolerance (e.g., “Max=0.2%). Figure 4, the values ​​for the EPM configuration are all red because they are above the corresponding maximum values, and the values ​​for the INDICHROMIE configuration are all green because they are below the corresponding maximum values. The maximum Delta-E value for "QUADRI" (e.g., "2,4") is depicted in yellow, which may indicate that it exceeds the maximum value (e.g., 2) while being only within a predetermined range, meaning that careful inspection of the comparison images may allow the user to decide whether the risk of this color impairment increment outweighs any additional cost of selecting other options. As noted above, the metric used to report out-of-tolerance is not limited to any particular metric, and whatever metric is chosen may have a corresponding maximum value associated with it for use in comparing the predicted outputs of candidate configurations to each other.

[0053] like Figure 4 As further shown in FIG. 4 , a colorant set 450 associated with the configuration INDICHROMIE is depicted and identified as a recommended colorant set. A list of color separations 460 associated with the identified INDICHROMIE press configuration is also provided. Each color separation is identified as a "process" color, or by type of "spot" color (e.g., Solid coating; designer), and may provide additional color information, such as a color warning ("Caution Pantone metallique"). The user interface also provides information about the file name ("Exemple OR.pdf"), a timestamp associated with the file (e.g., the date and time the file was last modified or saved), customer information, substrate information ("SupportSYNTHETIQUE_TRANSP"), operator information, and size information for the expected print result, as well as information for any portion being viewed.

[0054] The outputs discussed herein permit the press operator to select the most efficient configuration early in the printing workflow and enable more accurate planning and cost estimation.

[0055] Figure 6Schematically depicted in FIG. 6 is an exemplary system 600 for implementing various aspects of the present invention. Such a system includes a computer processor 610 connected to a display 620 and one or more input devices (such as user input including a keyboard 630 and a mouse 640) or any source 635 for receiving input, such as a database file stored in memory or a machine-readable file imported from an external source or from a portable machine-readable medium (DVD, flash drive, etc.) via a network, the machine-readable file containing information related to the method as described herein, including but not limited to color profiles, digital artwork designs, printing press configurations, or any of the above. The computer processor 610 is connected to a computer memory 650, which includes a medium programmed with machine-readable instructions for performing the method as described herein. A digital printing press 660 may also be connected to the processor. The system 600 is not necessarily the system that operates the printing press 660, and can operate independently of the printing press to process information as described herein. In such a system, the actual printing execution is performed by a different system, which can have some or all of the same features as described with respect to the system 600. The various components of the systems as described herein may be local to each other, distributed across a network such as a global communications network, or some combination thereof.

[0056] Thus, the system 600 includes a computer storage medium programmed with instructions for receiving, via one or more input devices, storing in a computer storage medium 650, and / or retrieving from a computer memory a subject digital artwork design 200, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and a color reproduction tolerance. It should be understood that the exemplary system may be capable of performing all of the aforementioned functions, including receiving relevant information from an input device, storing the information in a memory, and retrieving information from the memory when required for processing steps described in further detail below. The instructions also include instructions for storing in the computer storage medium a plurality of press configurations, each press configuration being associated with a press, a substrate, and a colorant set, and including color profile information and a set of rules for automatically converting any digital artwork design to the configuration. The instructions further include instructions for the following operations: for all colors in the subject digital artwork design, using a computer processor, converting the subject digital artwork design according to a corresponding set of rules for each of the plurality of press configurations. The instructions include instructions for: predicting, with a computer processor, the color output associated with each conversion corresponding to each press configuration; comparing, with a computer processor, the predicted color output associated with each conversion to the subject digital artwork design; and generating, with a computer processor, and displaying on a display, a comparison image, the comparison image including an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design, the image having a highlight corresponding to each portion of the design that is out of tolerance, and reporting a total area value outside of tolerance. Another aspect of the invention includes a non-transitory computer storage medium programmed with machine-readable instructions for causing a computer processor to perform a color pre-check operation as described above. Such a non-transitory computer medium may be a portable medium (e.g., a flash drive or an optical or magnetic storage disk storage device), a server from which a user may download instructions or portions of instructions for local storage, a hard drive from which instructions are locally stored and accessible, or a combination of local memory storage and Internet-accessible instructions stored "in the cloud." A computer system programmed with instructions as described herein is specifically programmed to perform the various functions and method steps as described.

[0057] Instructions, programs, or application(s) may be software or firmware for implementing device functionality associated with a device, such as a scanner, printer, and PC described throughout this specification. The programmatic aspects of the technology may be considered a "product" or "article of manufacture," typically in the form of executable code or process instructions and / or associated data, stored on or embodied in a machine or processor readable medium (e.g., transient or non-transitory), such as a memory of a computer used to download or otherwise install such a program into a source / destination PC and / or source / destination printer.

[0058] Other storage devices or configurations may be added to or substituted for those in the examples. Such other storage devices may be implemented using any type of storage medium in which computer or processor readable instructions or programs are stored, and may include, for example, any or all tangible memories or associated modules of a computer, processor, etc.

[0059] It should be understood that the various figures as shown herein may only depict certain elements of an exemplary system, and other systems and methods may also be used. In addition, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, even an exemplary system may include additional components that are not explicitly depicted or explained. Therefore, some embodiments may include additional elements that are not depicted in the various figures or discussed herein, and / or the elements depicted and / or discussed that are unnecessary for the embodiment may be omitted. In still other embodiments, elements with similar functions may replace the elements depicted and discussed herein.

[0060] Any steps or functionality of the systems and methods for converting graphic files for printing may be embodied in programming or one or more applications as previously described. According to some embodiments, a "function," "functions," "applications," "applications," "instructions," "instructions," or "programming" is a program(s) that executes the functions defined in a program. One or more applications structured in a variety of ways may be created using a variety of programming languages, such as an object-oriented programming language (e.g., Objective-C, Java, or C++), a procedural programming language (e.g., C or assembly language), or firmware. In a specific example, a third-party application (e.g., a program created using ANDROID ® by an entity other than the vendor of a particular platform) may be used to create a graphics file for printing. TM or IOS TM Software Development Kit (SDK) can be used to develop applications that run on platforms such as IOS TM ANDROID TM , Mobile software on a mobile operating system such as the iPhone or other mobile operating systems. In this example, third-party applications can call API calls provided by the operating system to facilitate the functionality described herein.

[0061] Therefore, machine-readable media can take the form of tangible storage media in a variety of forms. Non-volatile storage media include, for example, optical or magnetic disks, such as any storage device in (one or more) any computer, etc., such as a client device, a media gateway, a code converter, etc. shown in the accompanying drawings. Volatile storage media include dynamic memory, such as the main memory of such a computer platform. Tangible transmission media include coaxial cables; copper wires and optical fibers, including wires, which include buses within a computer system. Carrier transmission media can take the form of electrical or electromagnetic signals, or sound or light waves, such as those generated during radio frequency (RF) and infrared (IR) data communications. Therefore, common forms of computer-readable media include, for example: floppy disks, flexible disks, hard disks, magnetic tapes, any other magnetic media, CD-ROMs, DVDs or DVD-ROMs, any other optical media, punched card tapes, any other physical storage media with hole patterns, RAMs, PROMs and EPROMs, FLASH-EPROMs, any other memory chips or boxes, carriers that transmit data or instructions, cables or links that transmit such carriers, or any other media from which a computer can read program code and / or data. Many of these forms of computer readable media may be involved in carrying one or more sequences of one or more instructions to a processor for execution.

[0062] The scope of protection is limited solely by the claims now appended hereto, which, when interpreted in light of this specification and subsequent prosecution history, are intended and should be interpreted to be broad consistent with the ordinary meaning of the language used in the claims and encompassing all structural and functional equivalents.

[0063] It will be understood that the terms and expressions used herein have the common meaning consistent with such terms and expressions relative to the corresponding investigation and research fields to which they correspond, unless the specific meaning is otherwise set forth in this article. Relational terms such as first and second can be used only to distinguish one entity or action from another entity or action, without requiring or implying any actual such relationship or order between such entities or actions. The terms "include", "comprise", "include", "comprising" or any other variant thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that the process, method, article or device having, including or including a list of elements or steps not only includes those elements or steps, but also may include other elements or steps that are not explicitly listed or inherent to such processes, methods, articles or devices. In the absence of further constraints, an element preceded by "one" or "an" does not exclude the presence of additional identical elements in the process, method, article or device including the element.

[0064] Unless otherwise indicated, any and all measurements, values, levels, positions, magnitudes, sizes, and other specifications set forth in this specification, including the appended claims, are approximate and not exact. Such quantities are intended to have a reasonable range consistent with the functions to which they are related and with the customary practices in the art to which they belong. For example, parameter values, etc., whether or not qualified by a term of degree (e.g., approximately, substantially, or about) may vary from the stated amount by as much as ±10%, unless expressly stated otherwise.

[0065] In addition, in the foregoing detailed description, it can be seen that various features are grouped together in various examples for the purpose of simplifying the present disclosure. The disclosure method should not be interpreted as reflecting the intention that the examples claimed for protection require more features than those explicitly stated in each claim. On the contrary, as reflected in the appended claims, the subject matter to be protected may be less than all the features of any single disclosed example. Therefore, the appended claims are hereby incorporated into the detailed description, wherein each claim is by itself a subject matter claimed separately.

[0066] Although the foregoing has described what is considered to be the best mode and / or other examples, it should be understood that various modifications may be made therein, and the subject matter disclosed herein may be implemented in various forms and examples, and they may be applied to many applications, only some of which are described herein. The appended claims are intended to claim any and all modifications and variations that fall within the true scope of the present concept. Therefore, although the present invention is illustrated and described herein with reference to specific embodiments, the present invention is not intended to be limited to the details shown. On the contrary, various modifications may be made to the details within the scope and range of equivalents of the claims and without departing from the present invention.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method for performing a color preview operation, the method comprising: (a) providing a subject digital artwork design using a computer, the subject digital artwork design having a first set of color values, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and a color reproduction tolerance; (b) providing, by computer, more than two press configurations, each press configuration being associated with a press, a substrate, and a colorant set, and including a press-specific, substrate-specific color profile and a rule set for automatically converting any digital artwork design to the press configuration using the press-specific, substrate-specific color profile; (c) converting the subject digital artwork design using a computer according to a corresponding set of rules for each of a plurality of printing press configurations for all colors in the subject digital artwork design; (d) predicting, using a computer, a color output associated with each transformation corresponding to each press configuration, each color output defining a set of transformed color values ​​specific to the press configuration expressed in a selected device-independent color space; (e) comparing, with a computer, a predicted color output associated with each transformation with a comparison color output defined by a first set of color values ​​mapped to or otherwise represented in a selected device-independent color space, identifying any portion of the predicted color output that is outside of tolerance, and reporting a metric defining the relative amount by which the predicted color output is outside of tolerance; as well as One or both of the following: (f) for one or more selected transformations, generating with a computer and displaying on a computer display a comparison image, the comparison image comprising an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design, the image having highlights corresponding to each portion of the predicted color output that is out of tolerance; (g) automatically identifying, using a computer, one or more acceptable press configurations based on a first predetermined set of criteria, or automatically providing an alert indicating that no press configuration is acceptable, and optionally, automatically selecting the best press configuration from the acceptable press configurations based on a second predetermined set of criteria.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein: The more than two printing press configurations include at least one digital printing press configuration and at least one non-digital printing press configuration.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein: All configurations with more than two presses include digital press configurations.

4. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: The more than two printing press configurations include at least one configuration for a different substrate than at least one other configuration.

5. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: The more than two printer configurations include at least one configuration having a colorant set having fewer colorants than at least one other configuration of the plurality of printer configurations.

6. The method according to claim 5, wherein: The more than two printing press configurations include two or more of: at least one configuration with 3-colorants, at least one configuration with 4-colorants, at least one configuration with 5-colorants, at least one configuration with 6-colorants, and at least one configuration with 7-colorants.

7. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: Providing the color reproduction tolerance includes identifying at least one first portion of the digital artwork design having a different tolerance than at least one second portion of the digital artwork.

8. The method according to claim 7, wherein: At least one first portion is identified as an object or a bounded area of ​​the digital artwork design.

9. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: The metric defining the relative amount by which the predicted color output associated with each transformation is outside of tolerance includes a total area outside of tolerance value.

10. The method of any preceding claim, further comprising identifying one or more of a plurality of printer configurations having a minimum total area value outside of a tolerance.

11. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: Comparing the predicted color output associated with each transformation to the subject digital artwork design includes calculating Delta E for each portion of the predicted color output.

12. The method of any of the preceding claims, further comprising receiving a user input change to the tolerance, and redisplaying the color managed image, modifying the highlighting of each portion that is out of tolerance, and modifying the metric defining the relative amount of the out-of-tolerance in response to the user input change to the tolerance.

13. The method according to claim 12, wherein: The user inputted tolerance change is received via a graphical user interface including a slider operable between a relatively lower value and a relatively higher value, a displayed numerical tolerance value modifiable by inputting a different numerical value, or a combination thereof.

14. A method according to any preceding claim, comprising depicting in the comparison image areas within tolerance with a first erroneous colouring relative to the actual colouring of the subject digital artwork design, and depicting highlights with a second erroneous colouring.

15. The method of any of the preceding claims, further comprising defining the highlight within a highlight window, wherein the highlight window has an actual color of the subject digital artwork design or a third false coloring relative to the actual color of the subject digital artwork design, wherein the third false coloring is perceptually distinguishable from the first false coloring and the second false coloring.

16. The method according to claim 15, wherein: The first false coloring is darker or lighter than the actual coloring.

17. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: Each portion that is out of tolerance is highlighted in a color that is complementary or contrasting to the actual coloring of the subject digital artwork or a user selected coloring.

18. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: The total area value outside the tolerance is expressed as a percentage of the total area of ​​the digital artwork design, as a square of a dimensional unit, or a combination thereof.

19. The method of any preceding claim, further comprising defining a maximum value, an average value, an overall value, or a combination thereof for a metric defining a relative amount of predicted color output.

20. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: Metrics that define the relative amount by which the predicted color output is outside tolerance include Delta-E.

21. The method of claim 20, comprising calculating the maximum Delta-E and the average Delta-E for the region outside the tolerance for each printer configuration.

22. The method of claim 20, further comprising identifying acceptable maximum values ​​for the maximum Delta E, average Delta E, and total area out of tolerance, and comparatively reporting the maximum Delta E, average Delta E, and total area out of tolerance for a plurality of press configurations relative to the acceptable maximum values.

23. The method according to claim 19, wherein: The first predetermined set of criteria identifies one or more acceptable press configurations as having predicted color output having maximum, average, and total values ​​that are less than an acceptable maximum value identified for each of the maximum, average, and total values ​​of a metric defining a relative amount of the predicted color output.

24. A method according to any one of the preceding claims, wherein: The second set of predetermined criteria defines the optimal press configuration as having (i) a minimum amount of colorant compared to any other press configuration in the one or more acceptable press configurations; (ii) a minimum amount of out-of-tolerance area in a portion of the digital artwork design that is identified as being more critical than another portion of the digital artwork design; or (iii), a combination of (i) and (ii).

25. The method of any of the preceding claims, further comprising providing a cost estimate associated with each printing press configuration and ranking the printing press configurations based on cost, wherein a second predetermined set of criteria for selecting an optimal printing press configuration defines the optimal printing press configuration as the configuration with the greatest cost-effectiveness.

26. The method of claim 1, wherein: The first set of color values ​​is expressed in a selected device-independent color space.

27. The method according to claim 26, wherein: The first set of color values ​​is expressed in a device-dependent color space, and step (e) includes converting the first set of color values ​​to the selected device-independent color space using a color profile.

28. The method according to claim 26, wherein: The first set of color values ​​is expressed in a device-independent color space other than the selected device-independent color space, and step (e) includes converting the first set of color values ​​to the selected device-independent color space using a predetermined color profile, the predetermined color profile being used to convert other device-independent color spaces to the selected device-independent color space.

29. A system for performing a color preview operation, the system comprising a computer processor, one or more input devices operable to provide input to the computer processor, a computer display operable to display a visual image in accordance with commands executed by the computer processor, and a computer storage medium programmed with instructions for: (a) receiving, via one or more input devices, storing in a computer storage medium, and / or retrieving from a computer memory, a subject digital artwork design having a plurality of color values, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and a color reproduction tolerance; (b) receiving via one or more input devices, storing in a computer storage medium, and / or retrieving from a computer memory two or more press configurations, each press configuration being associated with a press, a substrate, and a colorant set, and comprising a press-specific, substrate-specific color profile and a rule set for automatically converting any digital artwork design to the press configuration using the press-specific, substrate-specific color profile; (c) converting the subject digital artwork design using a computer processor according to a corresponding set of rules for each of a plurality of printing press configurations for all colors in the subject digital artwork design; (d) predicting, with a computer processor, a color output associated with each transformation corresponding to each press configuration, each color output defining a set of transformed color values ​​specific to the press configuration expressed in a selected device-independent color space; (e) comparing, with a computer processor, the predicted color output associated with each transformation with a comparison color output defined by a first set of color values ​​mapped to or otherwise expressed in a selected device-independent color space, identifying any portion of the predicted color output that is outside of tolerance, and reporting a metric defining the relative amount by which the predicted color output is outside of tolerance; (f) for one or more selected transformations, generating with a computer processor and displaying on a display a comparison image, the comparison image comprising an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design, the image having highlights corresponding to each portion of the predicted color output of the design that is out of tolerance; as well as (g) Optionally, using a computer processor, automatically identifying one or more acceptable press configurations or automatically providing an alert indicating that no press configuration is acceptable based on a first predetermined set of criteria, and optionally, automatically selecting a best press configuration from the acceptable press configurations based on a second predetermined set of criteria.

30. The system of claim 29, wherein: The first predetermined set of criteria includes identified press configurations having maximum, average, total, or a combination thereof of metrics defining relative amounts of predicted color output that are less than an identified acceptable maximum for the corresponding value.

31. The system of claim 29, wherein: The second set of predetermined criteria includes an optimal press configuration having (i) a minimum amount of colorant compared to any other press configuration in the one or more acceptable press configurations; (ii) a minimum amount of out-of-tolerance area in a portion of the digital artwork design that is identified as being more critical than another portion of the digital artwork design; or (iii), a combination of (i) and (ii).

32. The system of claim 29, wherein: The computer processor is further configured to provide a cost estimate associated with each printing press configuration and to rank the printing press configurations according to cost, and the second set of predetermined criteria includes the best printing press configuration being the configuration that is most cost effective.

33. A non-transitory computer storage medium programmed with machine-readable instructions for causing a computer processor to perform color preflight operations, the instructions for: a) receiving, via one or more input devices, storing in a computer storage medium, and / or retrieving from a computer memory, a subject digital artwork design having a first set of color values, a color profile associated with the digital artwork design, and a color reproduction tolerance; b) receiving via one or more input devices, storing in a computer storage medium, and / or retrieving from a computer memory two or more press configurations, each press configuration being associated with a press, a substrate, and a colorant set, and comprising a press-specific, substrate-specific color profile and a rule set for automatically converting any digital artwork design to the press configuration using the press-specific, substrate-specific color profile; c) converting the subject digital artwork design with a computer processor according to a corresponding set of rules for each of a plurality of printing press configurations for all colors in the subject digital artwork design; d) predicting, with a computer processor, a device-independent color output associated with each transformation corresponding to each press configuration, each color output defining a set of transformed color values ​​specific to the press configuration expressed in a selected device-independent color space; e) comparing, with a computer processor, the predicted color output associated with each conversion to a comparison color output defined by a first set of color values ​​mapped to or otherwise expressed in a selected device-independent color space, identifying any portion of the predicted color output that is outside of tolerance, and reporting a metric defining the relative amount by which the predicted color output is outside of tolerance; as well as Do one or both of the following: f) for one or more selected transformations, generating with a computer processor and commanding a computer display to display a comparison image, the comparison image comprising an image corresponding to the subject digital artwork design, the image having highlights corresponding to each portion of the predicted color output that is out of tolerance; g) using a computer processor, automatically identifying one or more acceptable press configurations or automatically providing an alert indicating that none of the press configurations are acceptable based on a first predetermined set of criteria, and optionally, automatically selecting a best press configuration from the acceptable press configurations based on a second predetermined set of criteria.

Images