Pantone 295U is off from my pantone book

[Guest]

I am working with a client that uses pantone 295u as their primary color. I looked it up in my physical pantone book and it is a nice dark blue even in the uncoated guide. But...when I use the color book in ilustrator and pull up PMS 295 it looks like a 75% tint of the color, its not the dark blue thats in the printed guide book. I tried using overprint preview to see if the LAB preview might help, but with this color it makes no difference. Has anyone run into this? I'm not sure how to work with this as I cant show this greyed version in my proofs with the client as they will think I have not selected the right color.

Thanks

-KC

[Kals]

emil emil wrote:

Any color value without specifying its color space or in other words its output is meaningless. Any CMYK value printed on different printers and different media will give a different color.  So, what color is a CMYK value without knowing where it will output?

The output colour space IS defined, in a language both designers and printers understand—it's defined by the Pantone colour guide. The simplest workflow to understand (when specifying Pantone colours for CMYK output) is where the conditions under which Pantone prints the Colour Bridge guide are matched by your printer (as best they can). In that case, there is no conversion necessary. This kind of workflow predates digital colour management. It's simple and it works, because your source matches your target. When the printing conditions are not matched by your printer (different press, different paper, different inks, etc), this is where the printer's own colour management system comes into play, to ensure a close match to the Pantone guide. This means the designer doesn't have to worry about CMYK to CMYK conversions, and you'd probably find that most don't. (The default 'Press Quality' colour conversion setting for exporting PDF artwork from InDesign is set to 'preserve numbers' for CMYK colours.)

But now with Pantone Plus, if the designer unwittingly chooses a colour from the Solid Colour library when it's a full-colour process job, their CMYK profile better match their printer's perfectly, or they're in for a surprise, because these Lab colours will be converted to CMYK values when they export the PDF artwork. Like I said before, it's just another opportunity for designer error and unexpected results. There are also times when you actually want to be aware and in control of the CMYK values (e.g. to ensure a solid process component rather than a screen), and in this instance you lose all that control.

If you're a designer who never looks at the Pantone guide, choosing all your colours on screen, then yes, you need accurate digital colour management every step of the way. But either way, there's no requirement to specify Lab values in place of CMYK values.

As I tried to explain before, the Lab values represent the color of the Pantone ink as it appears to the human eye. The CMYK values don't represent any specific color but some average color from all outputs that Pantone considered and is not intended to match exactly a Pantone ink on any color space but will be in the ballpark. For this reason (avoiding inaccuracy) Pantone removed the CMYK method and now is using only the Lab method for matching Pantone inks with process colors.

Well, technically each human eye (device) is different and therefore requires its own colour profile. (Bad joke, but now that I think about it, that's a pretty cool idea and one I should probably patent.) Lab may well attempt to describes colour in values that are meaningful to how the eye perceives colour, but as I understand it, the real point of it in software is that it's device-independent, and can therefore be used to translate between other device-dependent colour spaces.

[emil_emil]

Kals wrote:

...

The output colour space IS defined, in a language both designers and printers understand—it's defined by the Pantone colour guide. ...

How it is defined? It is the same CMYK values for any possible printer and paper used. When you convert a Pantone color with the CMYK method in Illustrator to process it doesn't ask you what is you printer and paper - it always gives the same values regardless what output you are using. The same values on different outputs give different color so, color matching this way is practically impossible. And they can't provide CMYK values for any possible printer and paper combination, this is simply impossible. However if you use the Lab method when you convert to process colors the CMYK values will be different in each color space thus matching the appearance of the Pantone ink as much as possible in the current color space (profile) of the document.

Kals wrote:

... Well, technically each human eye (device) is different and therefore requires its own colour profile. (Bad joke, but now that I think about it, that's a pretty cool idea and one I should probably patent.)

No one can tell how each person comprehend colors but all people with normal vision will agree if a color is the same. So no color profiles needed and no one will use your patent . The colors are different wavelengths  that reach the eye and these wavelengths can be measured with a colorimeter. So defining a color with such measurement guarantees that all people will agree it is the same color and that's what Lab color space is based on.

On the other hand different devices don't agree that the same numbers are the same color and this is the problem color management is designed to solve.

[Kals]

emil emil wrote:

How it is defined?

By its appearance!   

If you think that's an unscientific answer, ask yourself how all these colour profiles get made in the first place. The profile that defines my display's colour space was created using an optical calibration device that scans the colours on my screen. I also have two optical devices in my head, and indeed I used to calibrate monitors with those many years ago, although it's certainly slower and a little less precise.

I know there are many more variables with printing than when calibrating a display, but the principle is the same. Your Lab values and device profiles are all meaningless until the printer can hold one print next to the other and say, 'Yep, that's a match!'

[emil_emil]

Kals wrote:

emil emil wrote:

How it is defined?

By its appearance!    ...

OK then, how do you define the appearance.

Color management basics very roughly:

Color is an event in your brain. This event is a reaction to a certain wavelength hitting your eyes. Whenever the same wavelength hit your eyes you react the same (you see the same color). A color measuring device measures the wavelength from a color (or in other words what you see).. The calibration software sends a color value to the monitor or printer, the device measures the output (the screen or the print) and the software records in the color profile of the device what wavelength (or color) this value gives on this device. The Color Management using the Lab color space knows which color gives what wavelength (or how you see colors). Then when you give a color value like CMYK or RGB and specify in what color space it is (the meaning), the Color Management knows what color it is the way you see it and will use the color profile of the output to match it.

You can’t see a color value, you see an output and, once more, the different outputs give different color from the same value. But the Color Management knowing what color you see can match it between devices by converting the color values to different numbers that represent the color you see on the target device.

... If you think that's an unscientific answer, ask yourself how all these colour profiles get made in the first place. ...

I explained above how color is measured and profiles made. The Lab color values provided by Pantone were made by measuring with a color device  the wavelength from the Pantone Formula inks and the values recorded in the Lab color space which covers the visible spectrum.

But how Pantone made the CMYK values? They didn’t use the Pantone inks but four process color inks.

There is only two known ways to get matching colors:

One way is using the Color Management by converting the Lab values representing a Pantone ink the way you see it to any output color space. But Pantone didn’t get the CMYK values that way because they are not specifying the output and these CMYK values do not match the Lab conversion to any standard or well known output.

The other way which is apparently what they used to decide the CMYK values representing their inks and this was done apparently before the Color Management hit the main street is trial and error. What else can be done without a color measuring device but print on various CMYK printers and different media and visually decide some average CMYK values that are close in appearance to the inks. Anything more scientific than this will involve color measuring device and then all values will go through the Lab color space.

[Cam Reesor]

This is a better thread of the conversation CS6 PMS Book Colors only as LAB because I agree with Kals...

Maybe I'm missing something here about best practices working with Pantone colors but...

I have clients with very specific CMYK specifications for their Pantone Spots (usually based on the CMYK values from the Manufacturer's Books).

In Illustrator (or InDesign), I used the same native files for a Spot color job and a process color job for expediency.

But now in Illustrator, when I switch from a spot to a process job using Pantone+: I get a CMYK separation value that is based on my Color Settings which is not the same as that in the Manufacturer's Book. The only way I know to fix this is to somehow find those original specs and rework the individual files.

In the new Illustrator, it appears like if I choose "Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books" (in spot colors dialogue in the swatch panel) when using Pantone+, I will get the correct Book value. But I don't. I get my Color Setting's idea of what that Pantone color should be.

Pantone hasn't changed their Book values for spot color separations with Pantone+. The average Joe, like me, who switches to a Pantone specced process job, is lead to believe that the Illustrator (InDesign or Photoshop) CMYK values are just fine and dandy. It's true that the CMYK spec (US Web Coated (SWOP) v2 for example) from the provided LAB color is a better approximation of the pantone color, but it's not the same as the Book value (which in most cases is the Client value which is the MOST important).

Is this something that's going to be fixed?

(In Photoshop, I'd love to see the integration of a similar workable "Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books" option. I constantly have to refer to the old Manufacturer's Books to get the appropriate CMYK values and adjust swatches to match or else I'm getting my Color Setting's idea of what that color should be.)

[Cam Reesor]

Here's an example.

I'm creating a 16 page booklet (Web coated SWOP) for AMEX (on befalf of an agency) that requires their artwork to be printed as PMS 288C (specced by AMEX as a Pantone Book Color of C100M67Y0K23). I get $5,000 to design the book and the print job is worth $150,000.

If for whatever reason AMEX isn't happy about the color of the book, I gotta be sure that there's at least no yellow dots on that thing or I'm exposed to liability that is far beyond my pay grade. I can't afford to have Illustrator or InDesign decide for me that a little bit more yellow and a little less black will be just the ticket to match that Pantone.

I have depended on the "Use CMYK value from Pantone's Book" option, the default 'Press Quality' colour conversion setting for exporting PDF artwork from InDesign set to 'preserve numbers' for CMYK colours, and the "Convert Spots to Process" without thinking twice about the outcome. Now I can't afford to just do that. Those "old" CMYK specs aren't just archaic, they're a kinda contractual agreement for me that helps me to sleep.

[Guest]

Something that might be helpfull for thouse that have not allready installed it is you can still download the old color books with the old CMYK values from adobe. See the link below and it tells you how to do it, and has the links for the old color books.

http://helpx.adobe.com/illustrator/kb/pantone-plus.html

[emil_emil]

Cam Reesor wrote:

Here's an example.

I'm creating a 16 page booklet (Web coated SWOP) for AMEX (on befalf of an agency) that requires their artwork to be printed as PMS 288C (specced by AMEX as a Pantone Book Color of C100M67Y0K23)...

If the client gives you the CMYK values for a color that will be printed 4 color process, why do you care if these values represent a Pantone color and why are you using Pantone colors in the first place for something that is going to be printed in CMYK and its CMYK values are specified? Illustrator has Color panel where you can create a CMYK color with specified values and save it as a swatch with any name like "My client's CMYK idea for PMS 288C"

If a client gives me such information for 4 colors CMYK printing, I will ask them why are they telling me that the given CMYK values are related with a Pantone color and what do they expect to happen from this additional information.

[Cam Reesor]

Easy Emil...

Almost every corporate client I work with specs their colors in Pantone. Almost without exception they provide CMYK color guidelines for those Pantone colors that are exactly the same as in the "old" Pantone Color Books.

I may be producing 10 various projects like Direct Mail, Letterhead, Brochure, digital or whatever. Some print as spot. Some print as CMYK. Some are both. Sometimes the same piece is printed both ways. Sometimes they change.

When I set up a Client program in the past, I could spec their Pantones in an Illustrator (InDesign) file and 'presto' the Book mix was there if I needed it. From there I could swing whatever way I wanted without monkeying with different setups or naming conventions (like "My Client's CMYK idea for PMS 288c which is exactly the same as in the Pantone Book"). One Illustrator logo: 10 projects. One InDesign file managed with the Ink Manager and "Preserve Numbers".

Maybe it's just on my end of the world... but my Client's don't give me CMYK specs for all the various press conditions. They just expect their simple Pantone to print at 0 100 95 10, regardless whether 6 97 94 7 gets them closer to the true Pantone color. I think they kinda like that we can lose the 4th plate every once and a while too!

It's just lazy of me, I know... But with every advance of CS: things always get a little more efficient.

[emil_emil]

Cam Reesor wrote:

... When I set up a Client program in the past, I could spec their Pantones in an Illustrator (InDesign) file and 'presto' the Book mix was there if I needed it. ...

Well, with the new pantone colors your life is not going to be that much easy and you have to do an additional thing but another group of users who appreciate more accurate color matching will be happy.

The additional thing that you have to do is:

Double click on the Pantone color swatch in the Swatches panel and from the Color Mode menu choose CMYK, enter the given values, click OK, and that's it.

Then whenever you convert the Pantone color of this document to CMYK it will always convert with the same values regardless what color space (profile) is assigned to the document.

[Kals]

emil emil wrote:

… but another group of users who appreciate more accurate color matching will be happy.

Emil, what you don't seem to get is this… You can't use the word 'accurate' without defining what you're attempting to match to. If the client is looking at the old Color Bridge Pantone book (which was printed using the old CMYK values) and your printer is used to matching to this, then the appearance of that book is the standard by which you judge how 'accurate' the final colour is—not how close it is to the Coated Spot Color guide or whatever the LAB values are based on. Now, it's likely that this new system is capable of producing more consistent colour across various press conditions if designers and printers both understand it and embrace a different workflow. But it's now more complex for the designer, and complexity WILL lead to unexpected errors, which is evidenced by threads like this.

A few examples have been discussed already. Here's another one… What colour library do we use when supplying a new logo to a client now? It used to be that you could supply one, or at most two colour versions (spot colour and CMYK). When you hand over these files, you do so knowing that you can't control under what conditions these will be used, but at least you could rest easy knowing that the CMYK numbers would remain intact, and without any client-side colour management at all, a printer could expect to see the same numbers defined by Pantone—numbers they know how to work with. But now you have different numbers defined for different papers, and no explicit CMYK numbers for spot colour libraries. So how do we supply a CMYK version of the client's new logo now? Do we give them one for coated paper and one for uncoated, in addition to spot colour versions? Then multiply that by each variation of the logo (e.g. if there is a vertical and horizontal version)? I tell you, clients have enough trouble as it is managing their logo files without all this confusion.

Cam Reesor gets it.

[Cam Reesor]

Emil, you're gonna hate my guts after this next bit, but I have to pipe up after being inspired by Kals ...

Editor's Note: Rich blacks and the occassional greys aside:

What I love about those "old" Pantone CMYK color guidelines is that whenever I spec a color right out of the book it always just gives me a max of 3 values (a 'max black generation GCR value' for arguments sake). Whenever I create a custom color (just like in a Pantone spec), I purposefully use only K for the grey factor. As far as I'm concerned, using the 3rd color to obtain gray values doesn't take the color to any magical new place that K can't get me to. It's just redundant. But worse than that...

1. Solid color just looks "sweeter" if it can be achieved with fewer plates. The fewer dots in there the better.

2. The fewer the plates in a solid color, the easier it is to color match

3. The more plates, the harder it is to register. And even the slightest misregistry just visually blows.

These factors are not being taken into account with this New Age Accuracy. Even if by some miracle the new values get us closer to the truth by 5% in some conditions, the final printed page just looks worse because of the redundant dots.

It's a personal problem I have to get over, I know, but it makes me puke when (in Illustrator(CSNow), Indesign(CSNow) and Photoshop(CSForever)) I convert a Pantone to CMYK and I get values of 96.8 58.9 12.8 23.6 . Apart from the whacky decimal places, the 12.8 Y has no business being in a solid color. Again: there's no fantasy color that it will take me to that K can't. There's really no expedient way that I can turn on and off (profile inherent GCR values) whenever I want to get what I would call a satisfactory color separation value.

Emil: Please explain to me how the addition of a fourth grey factor color and the subtraction of K can achieve a better color match for solid colors in any kind of printing situation?

Is it really just coincidence or convenience that every "old" Pantone CMYK color spec uses just 3 colors. And that no color uses anything other than K for the gray factor?

[Kals]

Cam, perhaps even more troubling than the addition of a fourth colour to me, is that you can't guarantee a 100% solid component, nicely illustrated in your example by that '96.8' value. When you're choosing colours from the book, there are instances where a clever designer might intentionally choose a colour where one of the process inks is at 100%. Why? Let's say you're reversing small white type out of a solid colour (something all designers love to do!) When you have a solid ink, you get nice crisp type at ridiculously high resolution. When it's not solid, you get a screen, and your small white type starts to look fuzzy.

That's what I meant in a previous comment when I said, 'There are also times when you actually want to be aware and in control of the CMYK values (e.g. to ensure a solid process component rather than a screen), and in this instance you lose all that control.'

[Cam Reesor]

You're right. I noticed that the other day. That's no minor thing.

Just so we're all on the same page:

Illustrator CS(Anything Other Than 6)

Color Settings: Anything you could even inadvertently, unwittingly or unknowingly dream up

Pantone 1795C:   C 0 M 94 Y 100 K 0

Illustrator CS6

Color Settings: North America General Purpose 2 (which by default gives us a CMYK working color space of U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2

Pantone 1795C:   C 10.77 M 99.87 Y 96.96 K 1.83

In this case, like Kal says, a sharp designer is just going to turn that M 94 to M 100 to get that amazing sharp reversed type. But even in every day positive solid color situations with type, lines and small solid color shapes, you don't want a screen in there, if it doesn't have to be. With even a decimal point away from a 100% component you instantly go from 2400 dpi to 133 dpi for example (even for ordinary jobs on dinky presses). If you could choose to print your images at they're full resloution of 300 instead of 150, you'd jump at the chance. With line art, we always have that opportunity.

So that CS6 Pantone 1795C value does this to the color:

1. It adds 2 new components to the color

2. It strips the yellow component of it's 100 value

So now maybe you have a truer match, but you also have a very inefficient color that doesn't have the visual integrity of the original.

This is an old whiny story, but I think it's worth adding here:

In most case scenarios, when I send my flattened bulletproof PDF/X-1a 2001 to the printer today: Unless something's just screaming at them from the document, somebody's just gonna press a "GO" button and, like magic, my humble file with whatever inadvertent errors finds itself directly on the big stage. If something's wrong on press: the finger of blame goes directly to me.

In the not so "old" days it took 10 pros (typographers, typesetters, proof readers, image experts, separation experts and color/film experts...) 10 hours each to produce a document. All these guys were highly experienced pros dedicated to just that trade for 20 years: They knew things we couldn't hope to know. They were also collectively earning big dollars for their contributions. Today, the little guy sitting in InDesign unwittingly has become all these guys in one. It takes him 10 hours to produce the same document. He truly needs to know everthing all those guys did to get the same results.

If things were just, and we did the obvious math, the delivered prepress PDF of a full-color 16 page self cover 3.5x8.5" booklet would be billed out at say $20,000. But the conveniently forgetful marketplace say's that it's worth $2,000 because the secrets out that only one guy did the whole thing. All the knowledge and expertise is invested in that document whether 10 guys or one guy did it. Today's fantastic Adobe software hasn't vanquished the need for that knowledge and expertise. The value of the document should properly reflect that. It doesn't.

The print cost for the document is the same as always: $100,000.

If I earn $20,000 to produce the PDF it's 20% of the print cost.

If I earn $2,000 to produce the PDF it's 2% of the print cost.

In an average worse case scenario: The job has to be pulled off press and reworked and it costs an extra $5,000.

The printer say's it's in the file, so I have to eat the cost if I expect to keep the client.

That shrunken earnings value doesn't take into account the same absolute exposure to risk.

We have wonderfully leveraged the expertise of our forefathers (by a factor of 10) to create a document that is worth 1/10th of it's original value. But since the print cost hasn't changed (and I have to factor in that 1 out of 10 times I'm gonna lose $5,000). I am also exposed to new risks that are not commensurate with my earnings.

Most of my blue chip clients don't really appreciate the price for quality proposition. They don't really care that the type is razor sharp anymore or that the color is just that much more a perfect shade of blue. That's pretty much just me and I find it difficult to charge for that. But they are good with arithmetic and risk management. I think that's why the "old" book values are a nice certainty for them. Most have been stung with unwarranted and additional costs when working with novice designers and they know savings when they see it.

If a job is gonna cost $100,000 dollars to print and I decide that we can do without a plate for example. That one change can save the client $5,000. The printer isn't gonna come up with that idea. If I'm billing the client $2,000. I just gave my work away for free and generated additional savings of $3,000 for the client. If the client knows I every so often pull off that kind of magic, he gladly accepts that I don't charge the market value for my services. He's actually happy that he pays me $5,000 for a $2,000 document. it's the only way I know how to reclaim some the true value of our "leveraged expertise".

Adobe software makes a lot of miraculous decisions for us about our documents so we can charge our $2,000. But it doesn't help me to make the $20,000 that we justly should get. When I notice by chance that CS(NOW) has arbitrarily popped in a 99.87 M value for what I wrecklessly thought was always 100, I have to ask one of the 10 guys what on earth to do about it, because everything in the software says you're better off than before. If I don't notice the 99.87 and those 10 guys are not around, then my $2,000 credit may just as magically turn into my $3,000 debit.

[emil_emil]

Cam Reesor wrote:

Emil, you're gonna hate my guts after this next bit, but I have to pipe up after being inspired by Kals ....

Hmm, no you can't make me hate your guts,

Listen dudes, I'm trying to help you with explaining what I know about the changes in the Pantone libraries, the related things, and how to solve your problems with the best intentions. I'm not trying to make you feel bad with this. I'm just a user who feel that I can share my knowledge hoping to help you. If you have a specific problem with using Illustrator, if I can, I'll be glad to help, but I don't feel like discussing something abstract like whether a rich or pure gray will match better a spot color. With color management when the destination has a narrower gamut that doesn't contain the color of the source, the color management offers several rendering intends and some other options to let the user choose what is best for the particular case. In fact many users prefer to choose the matching colors (make the conversion) themselves, and they rely on the color management only for displaying what's available within the limits of the destination color space. This is because, while everyone will agree if a color is the same, there will be different opinions what could be the two closest colors from several similar colors that are not the same. Experienced designers using color management or without color management with years of experience of printing on a certain printer know how to process print the color they have in mind or color they see in real life. Just open that printed Pantone swatch book and decide what color values will give the closest color on your printer, why do you have to rely on Pantone to tell you what color values you should use especially if you have to use a printer they have never seen. Their CMYK values are just one parties' opinion for matching colors.

[Cam Reesor]

I don't know why but...

I just tossed the old books from Illustrator, so I only have Pantone+

I open a new CMYK document (calibrated to North America General Purpose 2 default)

I choose "Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books" (in Spot Colors dialogue in the swatch panel)

I open a new any Pantone+ color and now I get the correct Book value.

That's the way it should be working. I have no problems with that at all.

Last week it wasn't doing that. I got those weird values, no matter what I chose in the Spot Colors dialogue

The problem is still in InDesign. There's no option to "Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books"

It's really just about the availability and efficacy of that option. We need it in all CS software (Photoshop included).

[Cam Reesor]

I stand corrected...

I think there's something broken.

I choose "Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books" (in Spot Colors dialogue in the swatch panel)

When I click on random colors, every so often one comes up as LAB.

Pantone 7750C comes up as LAB

Pantone 7708C comes up as LAB

Pantone 0821C comes up as LAB

Pantone 711C comes up as BOOK

Pantone 4715C comes up as BOOK

Do some of these Pantone colors not have CMYK Book values?

Any you guys seeing this too?

[emil_emil]

The Spot color option doesn't make any difference with the new plus libraries. The spot colors in them do not have CMYK book values specified and are defined only as Lab regardless what you choose in the Spot Color options.. Adobe has a web page with instruction how to installed the old library and a zip file with the old library that you can download. This link is mentioned in almost any thread about this topic. In this thread only it is mentioned three times in post 9, 21 and 32.

[Cam Reesor]

Yes. Thanks. Please don't mention it again: I've already added the old library 5 times.

Emil: You haven't validated a single point made in these posts for whatever reason.

Emil wrote:

The spot colors in the new plus libraries do not have CMYK book values specified and are defined only as Lab regardless what you choose in the Spot Color options.

That's just it. If the Plus libraries did carry the CMYK book values (as well) and you got them by hitting the "Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books" (in Spot Colors dialogue in the swatch panel) button; life would be good for us all. There would be no confusion. There would be no need to toss old and new books around. It's gotta be a simple fix or it becomes one of my top feature requests.

Surely we've expressed the legitimate need for designers to have straightforward access to these book values.

[Monika Gause]

If you need precise CMYK values I wouldn't rely on any Pantone conversion. At least in my part of the world it's perfectly normal to specify Pantone (or HKS) values in CI guide books for printing with spot colors. But to also specify exact CMYK values for printing on different stock. I have never seen in any of these guide books that the designer relied on automatic conversion of colors.

Most of the times their values even differ from those offered by Pantone.

So maybe Pantone did notice  and doesn't include CMYK values at all.

BTW: you could never rely on Pantone numbers for too long anyway. They changed the color definition from time to time. You always have to use the latest guide books if you don't want to get into trouble in color communication.

[Cam Reesor]

If you're working in CK in Illustrator ("Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books") you get the CK book color which is (hopefully the most recent HK spec for that spot color). You don't have any "automatic conversion" of color.

eg. Illustrator CS6 gives you HKS22E printing at C  M 80 Y 70 K

If you're diligent, you're going to compare that number to your CI Guide's spot color interpretation of that color. If they're the same and you're CI Guide doesn't specify different specs for different press conditions: you're good to go. It's pretty handy and a backstop for error.

But if you're working in Pantone+ in Illustrator ("Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books") you get Illustrator's interpretation of that color.

eg. Illustrator CS6 gives you Pantone 1795C printing at C 10.77 M 99.87 Y 96.96 K 1.83

Now you've got an "automatic conversion" of that color that doesn't reference a guide book at all (even though you're told that it does).

[Monika Gause]

Cam Reesor wrote:

If you're working in CK in Illustrator ("Use CMYK values from Manufacturer's Books") you get the CK book color which is (hopefully the most recent HK spec for that spot color). You don't have any "automatic conversion" of color.

But I have to rely on software being correctly set up and manufacturers color books not having been updated since I created the file. Also the printing processes aren't the same all over the world, so the color manufacturer's values might be way off.

I would call this "automatic" - since there's something happening which I cannot influence.

You made the impression that you want to be in total control over the printed values. In my opinion there's only one thing you can do: set up your CMYK values yourself.

[Kclcarlson]

It's obvious to me, this is a major problem that Adobe needs to address, I have found the problem with this "preference" also. I think Adobe forgot to actually code anything on the backend of this button.  We have clients documents that we have printed in the past and the same documents are magically colorshifting by just copying them into CS6 documents.

The button "convert using CMYK Book values" looks like the solution but it's not a preference that is sticky (every new document seems to turn it off), and it doesn't function correctly in the first place. For now using CS6 is a joke, clients are pissed and we've already absorbed reprint costs on two major jobs. We are forced to keep working in CS5 till they can get the bug worked out. Documents that were created in CS5 seem to keep the correct color builds once opened in CS6 but any new colors added to the pallet are converted with the LAB profile, so it's pretty useless even trying to work in 6.

[Monika Gause]

Kclcarlson wrote:

The button "convert using CMYK Book values" looks like the solution but it's not a preference that is sticky (every new document seems to turn it off),

create your own new document profile with the setting turned on.

[emil_emil]

Kals wrote:

...You can't use the word 'accurate' without defining what you're attempting to match to...

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I thought that I made it clear throughout the whole thread that Pantone made these changes to match more accurately on all possible outputs the appearance of the Pantone inks as perceived by the human eye. Pantone makes 13 basic inks which are mixed in the printing shops with various percentages as specified in the Formula guides, which define 1677 mixing formulas to get that number of spot colors. The goal of the PMS (Pantone Matching System) has always been to achieve a more accurate match to the appearance of the spot colors.

Kals wrote:

… What colour library do we use when supplying a new logo to a client now? It used to be that you could supply one, or at most two colour versions (spot colour and CMYK). When you hand over these files, you do so knowing that you can't control under what conditions these will be used, but at least you could rest easy knowing that the CMYK numbers would remain intact, and without any client-side colour management at all, a printer could expect to see the same numbers defined by Pantone—numbers they know how to work with. But now you have different numbers defined for different papers, and no explicit CMYK numbers for spot colour libraries. So how do we supply a CMYK version of the client's new logo now? Do we give them one for coated paper and one for uncoated, in addition to spot colour versions? Then multiply that by each variation of the logo (e.g. if there is a vertical and horizontal version)? I tell you, clients have enough trouble as it is managing their logo files without all this confusion....

Nothing is stopping you to continue the way you have done it if that's what you want. Pick any Pantone library you like, old or new doesn't matter, at the end you are giving your client the name of a Pantone color for spot color printing and a set of CMYK values that you are happy with. In my post #35 I told you how to do that. If you don't like that some channel like yellow has a value or is not rounded just round it or type 0, you can type 0 for all channels but one and it will print on one plate only if this is your goal. I really don't see this as a serious problem. You don't have to learn color management or educate your clients how to achieve consistent color on various outputs from different devices if so far you haven't done so and your business is fine. This has always been a problem and has nothing to do with Pantone. The only problem is opening documents with Pantone colors defined with the old libraries in a Illustrator installation with the new plus libraries. And you fix this as I said in post #35. Find the old values and define with them the spot color as CMYK build.