G7 on TAGA

There was lots of discussion regarding G7 on this years TAGA conference. There was a session devoted on it. Everyone could chip in a comment. Most of the comments were against it. Why? There was only one published paper on it. Apart from this, there was no published research to substantiate the unfavorable comments. The research community should be the first to know that we need to back up our claims with research.

Being on the field right now, I NEED to be able to read published results regarding any new technology that can help me be more productive, and I need it from this community. Going into endless discussions about how and why it doesn't work is totally worthless, if not damaging.

The main argument against G7 is that it doesn't take into account the color of the inks. Profiling does. Even more, device link profiling is able to calibrate the presses and in the same time take into account the colorants. I buy that. I have tested device link profiles and I know that they are able to do an amazing job. Within the next month, I will test out G7 as well and see for myself if it works.

I have to comment on Dave McDowell's efforts (who was awarded for his immense contribution to the industry) to close the gap between the group that is for and the group that is against G7. Dave, and the particular ISO committee are trying to put G7, ISO 12647 and device link profiles into agreement taking the strenghts of each method into account. I would love to see the ISO document and I hope that it comes out soon enough.