why are pantone conversions based on SRGB RGB instead of L*a*b*?

[bteifeld]

I would like to know why Serif is not providing L*a*b*-based specifications for the swatches

in each of the Pantone Decks it supplies with the Serif Applications. SRGB is an inferior and

inaccurate representation of the swatches in some cases because the SRGB color space

profile gamut CANNOT encompass all the swatch colors.

 

Please consider ensuring that all Pantone swatch definitions are specified in L*a*b* as soon

as possible.

 

P.S. Providing the Cotton TCX and Paper TPG decks would be helpful.

[lacerto]

In the context of PANTONE policy change, it is not likely that they are willing to distribute up-to-date color data, or even legacy or fractional one (the kind included in Affinity apps) in color profile independent formats like L*a*b, and especially in kinds of open database formats as .csv (= the format in which Affinity apps distribute their PANTONE data). L*a*b based PANTONE data has always been information that is distributed selectively, but at the moment it is something that the company guards vigorously and only allows spreading in pieces and via controllable channels (e.g. by way of PANTONE Connect).

[bteifeld]

Thank you for your reply. I think we need to know from Serif what the reality of their

licensing arrangement actually is.

[lacerto]

Another issue [specifically within Affinity apps] is that even if PANTONE colors were given in L*a*b space they cannot be shown in that color space, unless the gamut of the document color space is also L*a*b (or wide enough to cover PANTONE definitions). In practice spot colors are typically used in CMYK color documents in which case many PANTONE spot colors look quite desaturated and unrealistic.

[bteifeld]

Actually you might be interested in knowing about GretagMacbeth Colorpicker and its lineal descendant,

Colorlogic Colorant L. These tools are able to take an ICC profile associated with a given media/print process

in combination with a L*a*b* definition of a spot color and produce an optimized ink build which

in many(but not all) cases can hit the spot color very well. This makes having the L*a*b* data

valuable as long you also have a proper ICC profile.

 

[Hangman]

My understanding is that Adobe are, starting August 2022, phasing out support for Pantone colour books from their Adobe Creative Cloud applications ultimately resulting in access to all Pantone libraries requiring a paid Pantone Connect subscription which currently costs £14.99/month or £89.99/year. I wonder how much monetary kick back Adobe are getting as part of that deal?

You and I hope Serif may also be interested in the non-profit association freieFarbe e.V., https://freiefarbe.de/en/ who have developed what is effectively a licence free alternative colour system and one that would/could ultimately compete with Pantone... this video explains further...

[lacerto]

I think that there is very little need for any "alternative" trademark or authoritative (even free, community based) color books or libraries. Custom palettes (whether L*a*b or sRGB-based) are very easy to create and share and there are such online palette-providers already plenty some free some subscription based or otherwise charging something for their services.

Since color management is supported so widely (including web) there has not practically been much need for specifically "matching" colors against printed references or a specific color system for well over a decade. One gets more predictable and trustworthy colors with a calibrated display (with wide enough gamut to cover printing or audience needs) and ISO color profiles than with any such color reference system.

PANTONE and similar systems are still useful when there is need for custom inks, and then a printed reference is still the best guide. The change in PANTONE policy can be a bit of a nuisance for people who constantly need these colors in their workflows, but they are professional designers and the cost is trivial, and creating e.g. spot swatches is pretty easy even without linked color books and even if the current PANTONE Connect plug-in at its current stage is a poor legacy component and its UI is awkward and usability very poor.

The impact to most users is mostly unnoticeable because disruptive behavior has been diminished, and workarounds (e.g. to assign an sRGB representation free of charge in situations a color book reference is broken) pretty easy. For those users who are accustomed to use trademark color books as a collection of conveniently accessible and somehow meaningfully grouped colors there are plenty of other options available, directly based on shareable, accurate, profile-based color values. PANTONE is by no means needed for that. Personally I'd prefer a practice where color values are always just given in context of profiles.

EDIT: One further point: instead of using fixed predefined color palettes, there is more practical need for creating custom palettes based on some criteria, e.g. on accessibility, color harmony, etc., but typically something that can be created on principle of color styles, and which can then easily be switched so that alternative designs with different palettes can easily be generated. Such services are widely available on cloud based template based designs, and such palettes can subsequently be shared not just with team members and designers using the same service but with anyone involved.

[Hangman]

My interpretation, rightly or wrongly, in terms of what freieFarbe e.V. are setting out to achieve is to create an industry colour standard that is free for all in the same way that water should be free for all. Colour should not be something that can be copyrighted or trademarked (in my opinion at least).

I can't claim to be up to speed with the developments and policy changes that PANTONE have introduced but outwardly it sounds as though, in the current print era, they're perhaps fighting to stay relevant and maybe there is an element of greed involved too, who knows, though maybe that assumption is completely wrong.

While it is indeed very easy to create and share custom palettes via online palette-providers I also think in general end users want convenience so having an industry wide, industry recognised colour system that is also free to use which is widely adopted makes a lot of sense rather than individual designers or companies scrabbling around online, here, there and everywhere to cobble something custom together which is not such a great approach.

Of course, you're right, for the big agencies and professional designers, they I'm sure will just accept this policy change, adopt it and move on without blinking and eyelid but I think you have to also consider the individual freelance designers and SMEs as well in the equation.

I've not used the PANTONE Connect plug-in so I can't testify to how good or bad it is but the mere fact you say, in its current form, it is is a poor legacy component and its UI is awkward and usability very poor already says a lot. If there is an alternative that is easy to implemet, use and is free, is that not potentially a better option or solution for everyone in the longer term...

I'm not in anyway disagreeing with you regarding the alternative options already available but just felt that the intentions and approach freieFarbe e.V. are adopting makes a lot of practical sense, I guess only time will tell in terms of whether they succeed.

Out of complete curiosity regarding the PANTONE policy change, where does Serif stand on that front, I realise their PANTONE libraries are all csv based but does the PANTONE Policy change have any direct impact on how Serif are permitted to use their PANTONE libraries or is there any likelihood that they may have to adopt the same stance as Adobe by removing the PANTONE libraries.

[lacerto]

13 hours ago, Hangman said:

My interpretation, rightly or wrongly, in terms of what freieFarbe e.V. are setting out to achieve is to create an industry colour standard that is free for all in the same way that water should be free for all. Colour should not be something that can be copyrighted or trademarked (in my opinion at least).

But is it a custom ink system that controls how print inks are prepared, or simply just a (digital) color reference? If former I am not sure if they can be free and even competitive (considering creating and testing ink mixes and need for having globally available printed reference books for colors that cannot be represented trustworthy digitally within e.g. sRGB); and if latter, just collections of digital color libraries with profile or L*a*b based reference, then there does not seem to be anything new.

Many people no doubt feel it necessary to pick a color from a predefined and freely distributable color collection, or prefer to deliver a color by some registered name, code or reference (controlled but distributed free of charge by some instance), but I cannot see any issue in current policies. There are free services, and paid services, who already do that. I sincerely welcome any addition freieFarbe can provide, but in a way I see this as a kind of a "counter measure" against some silly thing like PANTONE color of the year: storm in a PANTONE color mug ;-).

I can fully understand that PANTONE charges for their special inks. The point is that most people do not need them. Why should they feel offended if someone needing them a lot has to pay a bit for ease of use (well, they do not get that with any money at the moment 🙂. Charging for color reference does not mean that "this blue within the gamut of human vision is no longer free".

13 hours ago, Hangman said:

is there any likelihood that they may have to adopt the same stance as Adobe by removing the PANTONE libraries

A good question. In the long run perhaps. But I think that PANTONE is primarily interested in protecting L*a*b based references distributed as database-kind of collection, whether legacy .acb books, or some other method. Serif .CSVs distribute sRGB data, and that is freely available also via PANTONE Connect that can be accessed via web (so no plug-in is required), and without cost. I think it is likely that in the future PANTONE colors need to be accessed like this. But it is practically impossible to control the legacy use so they are probably focusing on "new" colors and trends. In a word, professional, industrial use.

[lacerto]

18 hours ago, Hangman said:

who have developed what is effectively a licence free alternative colour system and one that would/could ultimately compete with Pantone...

I could not access the video earlier but watched it now. It is not clear but it seems that they do ultimately aim at custom ink based color system similar to PANTONE and if so then what I mentioned above is pretty much off the topic.

However when I tried to find out about the development after 2019 I could not find much anything than a database and conversion utility covering over 300 color systems at https://freiefarbe.de/en/thema-farbe/farbdatenbank/. As a graphic designer I am not sure if I want to know more of any of these industrial color systems most of which are unknown to me but if there is ever need, I'll remember this site.... But presently, if there is any need for special inks and the free sRGB based PANTONE color data and representation is not sufficient, I rather "rent" PANTONE for the time I really need to access full color data and add the cost to the invoice.

Perhaps it is the big industry, fashion, interior design etc. that benefit from "open source" color, but for the moment there does not seem to be much in the interest of independent graphic designers.

EDIT: If freieFarbe intends to enter in the world of physical colors, it is not PANTONE they are competing with but the parent enterprise Danaher Corporation who owns X-Rite, PANTONE and Munsell. Yes, please give us free color calibrators, ColorChecker Passport equivalents, printed reference books, universal L*a*b based digital color books, etc. I believe immediately when I see! But if all that is provided is a database of color values of single swatches, it is not nearly enough, because it is not just about communication of color information, but integration with design tools -- apps and devices -- that counts. E.g. their database includes Lab-based color values of Munsell color system, but not e.g. a digital palette, which can be purchased separately from e.g. Adobe Stock at EUR 9.55 as an .AI file that can be exported to an .ASE palette, but then again, you need a CC based AI to be able to make the conversion. See, they are all connected and nothing is given free, but it also does not cost awfully lot assuming that you do this to make a living.

[Hangman]

14 hours ago, lacerto said:

But is it a custom ink system that controls how print inks are prepared, or simply just a (digital) color reference?

My take is that its very much the latter but I could be wrong...

9 hours ago, lacerto said:

However when I tried to find out about the development after 2019 I could not find much anything than a database and conversion utility covering over 300 color systems

I agree, there seem to be little in terms of recent updates though I've not spent a great deal of time researching them to date, I'll really need to spend more time to be able to come back with some cohesive answers to your questions...

9 hours ago, lacerto said:

E.g. their database includes Lab-based color values of Munsell color system, but not e.g. a digital palette

There are 378 free .ase files available to download here... https://freiefarbe.de/en/thema-farbe/software/ including one for Munsell.

[lacerto]

Ok, sorry for jumping to false conclusions. Are there any yet available that are creations of their own, or is this merely a collection of resources gathered from the Internet and posted by users? Anyway, a nice resource, and useful even without an exhaustive, global and free alternative color system ever being devised and developed.

My point was more or less that IMO there is no need for such a system, as alternatives are so widely available, many of which free of charge. On the other hand, I think that printed color books like those of Munsell, NCS, and PANTONE, and associated digital references with tools and features making a specific color system still more useful, continue to be needed in certain workflows and will continue to be something that costs. But in general use they have become more or less obsolete since color management went mainstream.

[Hangman]

35 minutes ago, lacerto said:

Are there any yet available that are creations of their own, or is this merely a collection of resources gathered from the Internet and posted by users?

They are all created by freieFarbe e.V., this absolutely isn't a collection of resources gathered from other locations...

To quote them, they provide "the HLC Colour Atlas (XL) produced by the Proof GmbH on an Epson SC-P9000V Spectro printer at high cost for quality optimisation. The printing system used is predominantly used in the areas of proofing for pre-press, fine art printing and art reproduction. Thanks to the additional colours orange, green and violet, even highly saturated colours can be reproduced. To further increase colour accuracy, iterative CMYK optimisations are carried out on the software side. In this way we achieve an average DeltaE2000 of 0.8, most colour patches even a DeltaE2000 of 0.3. The colour accuracy achieved was not feasible a few years ago, it approaches that of the far more expensive varnish printing."

They understandably charge for the printed version of their Colour Atlas but the Colour Atlas is also available as a free pdf download along with...

• PDF version: HLC Colour Atlas for soft proofs on screen, for self-printing, for quick gamut comparison (CIELAB, sRGB, CMYK according to FOGRA39/51/52).
• Measurement report of the printed HLC Colour Atlas with target/actual comparison and DeltaE calculations (Excel)
• ASE colour libraries for the Adobe CS and CC programmes, with which one can use the colours shown in the atlas directly in the applications.
• sRGB and CMYK colour value tables in Excel format
• Spectral data 380-730 nm in 10 nm intervals: the CXF3 format is compatible with industrial colour formulation systems in different industries, such as printing inks, paints, plastics or textiles.

It seems to me that one of their main philosophies is to provide a comprehensive alternative to all the other colour systems out there and to provide their colour system free of charge to end users so you don't end up with third-party ownership of individual colours and of the most important colour collections or find yourself in the situation of not being able to use certain colours because they are under copyright or trademark protection like for example, Nivea Blue (Pantone 280 C) which has been protected since 2007 by the German Trademark & Patent Office as a colour trademark for body and beauty care products, despite Unilever attempting to have the tradmark cancelled in a legal dispute. This means that nobody else can legally use Pantone 280 C for body and beauty care products.

Again, in their own words and from their point of view they say, "a rethink would be necessary: away from the manufacturer collections - towards calculated colours. We should simply follow calculated colour models everywhere, because purely mathematically determined colours are copyright and licence-free.

Modern technology makes it possible. In the computer, calculated colours have long been a reality, here colour has long been fully calculable and comparable. Almost all software allows free colour input and colour calculation, and so-called "colour management" is built into all major operating systems.

Calculated colours are also calculable, in the literal and comprehensive sense, and this has numerous advantages in practice. Just try to create a brightness gradient with RAL or Pantone colours or to determine a counter colour. With mathematical colours this is no problem at all."

The reason I intitially started looking at this was because of the PANTONE policy change and how this has pushed Adobe into removing PANTONE libraries from their Creative Cloud suite, I was curious to know how this might affect Serif should they be 'forced' to remove the PANTONE libraries from the Affinity suite and then potentially end up telling users they have to pay a licence fee if they wish to continue using them and/or integrate PANTONE Connect into their software in a similar fashion. At the price point of the Affinity software and because a large portion of their customers have likely moved away from Adobe to avoid the subscription model, suddenly being 'forced' to pay, if you want or need access to PANTONE libraries (for convenience) would likely not go down well I suspect.

As you said previously, this is not perhaps such an issue for agencies and corporates with money to burn but for the SME and freelance fraternity it is perhaps a different matter and on first glance, freieFarbe e.V., seemed like an interesting approach and alternative, though I still need to dig deeper to get a better understanding of where they are at and what their plans are moving forward. I know they have a number of professional industry partners on board but I'll have to do some more reading to get a clearer picture...

Long story short, I just felt it was interesting, 'professional' and 'free' were two words that piqued my interest... 🙃

 

[henryanthony]

Very interesting discussion. I appreciate all the thoughtful comments. FWIW, I found some free stuff including ase files related to this here:

https://freiefarbe.de/en/thema-farbe/software/

Reminds me of how the Munsell color system is presented.

https://munsell.com/

I now see that information I posted may be redundant to previous posts. Oh well...

[Hangman]

1 minute ago, henryanthony said:

FWIW, I found some free stuff including ase files related to this here:

I've already installed some of the free .ase palettes in Designer to try them out...

2 minutes ago, henryanthony said:

Reminds me of how the Munsell color system is presented.

Exactly, very similar...

[lacerto]

34 minutes ago, Hangman said:

They are all created by freieFarbe e.V., this absolutely isn't a collection of resources gathered from other locations...

Sorry, I was inaccurate. I did not mean the samples and file generation but information itself, so e.g. Munsell ASE file is not naturally intellectual property or creation of their own even if the file is generated by them and color samples carefully produced. But what you mention here is certainly good to know.

But I also asked because I noticed that they urge visitors (or just specifically color system manufacturers?) to upload palette files, and that they also seem to state a typical open-source disclaimer saying something like "if you notice that information shared here violates someone's copyrights, please let us know".

But I'll go and view more carefully what is available and what is stated and stop making more wrong and hasty assumptions! Thanks for sharing this resource!

 

[lacerto]

19 hours ago, Hangman said:

It seems to me that one of their main philosophies is to provide a comprehensive alternative to all the other colour systems out there and to provide their colour system free of charge to end users so you don't end up with third-party ownership of individual colours

I now had a closer look on this, and indeed their goal is to compete with other global color reference systems. What you mentioned above about possible monetary kickback for Adobe because of change of PANTONE policy does not sound such a crazy idea since I suppose Adobe could well have included HLC Colour Atlas (if it is really free) as an alternative color book for PANTONE (or at least as an .ASE file) in their apps. It would certainly be a good idea to have it included in Serif apps.

So it appears that the system will (or perhaps already does) include also instructions for mixing inks. For the moment I suppose giving printers something like this would cause some confusion, though:

The freedom speech aside (since if someone is going to use this as a replacement of Munsell, NCS or PANTONE, it is going to cost a bit, too), this could well become a universal color system one day!