Against the grain

February 2008 - Posts

• Print by numbers

  There's a case of double standards going on in print. Or is it triple standards? Either way, it's fair to say that controlling consistency in colour in a world of hard copies and soft proofing throws up a lot of standardisation issues that are anything but regular. The first number to remember is 12647. Or ISO 12647, to be exact. Printers face a multi-coloured minefield in the search for this standard. And – if you'll humour me as I plumb the depths of colourful puns – it's a complex complexion saturated with value judgements and infused with shades of intricate detail, making it more than a little difficult for the average print journalist to illuminate the issue. Basically, you could gather from that that I don't fully understand it (and also that I've pawed the pages in my thesaurus bearing entries for 'colour', 'hue' and 'shade' until the ink ran). Now that my fount of synonyms has run dry, I'll turn to another journalist to spell it out. In a recent PrintWeek Product of the Week, Karen Charlesworth called ISO 12647 "a definition of the necessary parameters to ensure a reliable match between proof and print" as she reviewed a tool to help printers comply with the standard. And as the case for soft proofing becomes, erm, hard to ignore, any tools that helps bring regularity to colour quality are worth having. Especially as that standard now has a version for every colour of the rainbow, or at least, for seven different pre-press and print processes. There's a whole fleet of options for investment. The Guardian, for instance, has just picked ICS's Remote Director as it moves to soft proofing in its repro department, all the while angling for the lucky number 7 strand of ISO 12647. In a one-standard-fits-all world, we could end there. But wait, there's more. It's all well and good to match colours from proof to press, but that relies on the substrate, the ink, the press, the RIP and, of course, the viewing conditions. For the latter, printers can also turn to ISO 3664, a standard that should be as at home in the print room as it is in the dark room. If anyone else, like me, is still trying to get on speaking terms with these ISOs, I would advise trepidation going forward. Because according to print body Fogra, there's another standard on the way, this time the memorably titled 'TS 10128' for press specification. With only scarce details to go on, I won't pretend to offer educated advice on the looming standard, other than to say we'll be hearing more in the future. So the holy trinity of ISO 12647, 3664 and the impending 10128 answer my first question – it is set to be a case of triple standards. And considering the constant developments and various incarnations spawned by ISO 12647, and the fact that colour management policy can be just one component of an overarching quality system like ISO 9001, you'll need to keep your wits about you to continue to play print by numbers. Posted Feb 22 2008, 08:05 AM by Steven Kiernan with no comments

• Paper rocketing down, for once

  With all this brouhaha over paper prices rising, I thought it's be nice to talk about paper falling. Not prices, alas, but a downward trend in paper all the same. When I say 'trend', perhaps 'downward spiral' would be more apt – some "eccentric" Japanese scientists (read: boffins with more time than sense) have decided to launch paper aeroplanes from the International Space Station (ISS). Okay, so maybe there was a hint of ridicule in my breakdown of their 'sense:time' ratio, but I'll also say they're living out every boy's dream. As a kid, I counted myself lucky if my 80gsm jetfighter made the flight from my eight-year-old hand to the ground without barrel rolling into a crumpled mess. I'm assuming that Professor Shinchi Suzuki and his team will be using a somewhat higher-spec grade than your standard copier paper and with a considerably more rigorous design. Still, I never had the help of the Japan Origami Airplane Association at my disposal when hastily folding my A4 masterpieces while the teacher wasn't looking. Nor did I have a hypersonic wind chamber for test runs. When you're pouring public money into what is essentially a class-clown act on a galactic scale, justification would come in handy. Professor Suzuki has said: "We think from this experiment we will be able to create new concepts and in the very near future perhaps new types of airship from this design." Wish I'd tried that excuse with Mrs Moreland in Maths class. Seriously though, the whole research project does add cache to paper's image as a resilient and durable medium. Just try powering Amazon's Kindle e-book reader up to Mach 7 in temperatures of 300C. I'll put my money on the pulp-based alternative any day. If only there was some way to duplicate the results and apply them to paper freighting. There'd definitely be fewer concerns over carbon miles if all stock could be sent more than 400km using unpowered flight, which is the approximate distance from the ISS to we mere mortals. Any chance the UPMs and Stora Ensos would consider a geosynchronous pulp mill? I probably shouldn't tempt fate – there are enough arguments over domestic paper capacity as it is, without throwing inter-orbital production into the equation. Considering the recent revelations about Japan's biggest paper companies falsifying levels of recycled content in their office paper, I should probably steer clear of the green angle. But talking of the paper power players, there must be a sponsorship opportunity here somewhere. Space station Mir-Real anyone? Watch this 'space' for more, but in the meantime, here's a clip of a somewhat less ambitious but still incredibly impressive paper aeroplane flight.  Posted Feb 07 2008, 07:14 AM by Steven Kiernan with no comments

• Death and print

  At the risk of putting a downer on your day, a terrible accident at a US print shop throws spotlight on our own health & safety laws here in the UK. This week's news that a San Francisco print worker was crushed to death in an incident in the finishing department reinforces the need to stay abreast of the evolving nature of our legislation. Margarita Mojica, 26, had been an "experienced machine operator" at Digital Pre-press International since 2005 before she was entangled in the firm's Yawa die cutting machine on Tuesday morning. It gets worse. In a tragic turn, the San Francisco Chronicle also revealed that she was four months pregnant. The issue of liability and standards of workplace health and safety will undoubtedly be under scrutiny in the US Occupational Safety & Health Administration's (OHSA) investigation. Forums on local newspaper websites are rife with questions over whether a pregnant woman should be operating "dangerous machinery". That's a question for the OHSA rather than a knee-jerk reaction, but the whole matter does bring us to the impending Corporate Manslaughter Act 2007 (the Corporate Homicide Act in Scotland). The Act, set to hit with full force on 6 April this year, is the newest chapter in an ever-changing approach to industrial accidents traced back to the Zeebrugge ferry disaster some 20 years ago. In that disaster, the inquest returned a guilty verdict, but no convictions took place. More recent and relevant was the death of Richard Thomas at a UK paper mill in May 2003, for which the (by that point insolvent) company was fined a paltry £200. Trade union Unite has been at the vanguard of calls for tougher legislation and stiffer penalties, including jail terms for directors and managers. As Unite's Tony Burke said in no uncertain terms at last year's Labour conference: "It is time employers found guilty of killing or seriously maiming their staff go to prison." Under previous laws, convictions have been rare. According to Jonathan Coatman from insurance giant QBE, in the 34 prosecutions for corporate manslaughter since 1992, there have been only six convictions. He also notes that all these involved small companies in which the individual was "intimately involved in the health and safety breaches" – a stark reminder considering how much of our industry comprises small-scale firms where staff juggle multiple roles. The new Act has done little to satisfy the push to bring individual punishments. In fact, individual liability is specifically excluded. That's not to say the Act offers any immunity, just that existing health and safety and general law still applies. What the Act has done is offer significant power to tarnish the image of companies found to be in breach. The Act allows for "publicity orders", forcing convicted businesses to publish details of their failings and punishment at their own expense. Fine or no fine, a firm tarred with that brush would have an uphill battle to survive the public outcry and stigma sure to follow. But the Act is not about spurring on witch-hunts. As the Bill states: "There is no question of liability where the management of an activity includes reasonable safeguards and a death nonetheless occurs." So the buzzword is preparation. The 6 April roll-out is still months away, giving businesses time to align with best practice policies and systems, as well as the headier task of changing attitudes to safety. So what can businesses do? Anyone with an existing management system, such as ISO 9001 or ISO 14001, should be old friends with the 'Plan, Do, Check, Act' catchphrase. Familiarity with the Health & Safety at Work Act (HSWA) and Management of Health & Safety at Work Regulations would be useful. And while it's commended to gain health and safety systems such as HSG65 and BS OHAS, beware using third-party certifications to deflect blame – ensuring that a proactive approach to health and safety is an intrinsic part of the firm's culture is the name of the game. I doubt anyone would argue that a worker's life is more valuable than a company's public perception. But accidents do happen. And when they do, a firm would be well placed to prove it's toeing the health and safety line – or better yet, exceeding the minimum legal expectation. It may be the only way to avoid prosecution, hefty fines and a backlash from staff, customers and the wider public alike. Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 on the HSE website United Kingdom: The ‘Don’t Kill’ Bill! by Jonathan Coatman Ministry of Justice – Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 Posted Feb 01 2008, 01:10 AM by Steven Kiernan with no comments