by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
FLEXO Magazine : November 2009
www.flexography.org NOVEMBER 2009 FLEXO 41 For a full conference agenda visit www.nehsconference.org. March 15-17 • Indianapolis, IN The 2010 NEHS Conference --- Now in its 15th Year! Plan now to attend the 2010 NEHS Conference — the one event for the graphic arts industry that intersects the needs of safety, environmental and human resources. Today’s workplace requires multitasking – and this conference provides you with the tools and information to accomplish this goal! Join us in Indianapolis as we continue our journey towards a sustainable future for the graphic communications industry! Interact with your peers, suppliers and customers! Bring two from your company: register one person and get the second registration half off! Brought to you by: samples, and it illustrates the higher sensitivity to IFT differ- ences of Status I density. Next, the colorimetric sensi- tivity of polarized and unpo- larized readings for bronze metallic colors is discussed. Figure 4 displays an a*b* plot of the same sample. It can be observed that unpolar- ized readings have a larger chromatic difference, since the square spots are further away from each other than the circle spots. This means that unpolar- ized filters are, to a degree, more sensitive in describing the chromatic variation due to IFT, even if they fail to be as accu- rate with regard to lightness. The analysis proceeds with the discussion of chroma and lightness in CIE LCh for the same bronze metallic sample. In Figures 5 through 7, in the close up of lightness it is observed that the difference of the polarized readings (cir- cles) for low and high density is larger than the difference of the unpolarized readings. On the contrary, chroma displays a larger difference in the case of the unpolarized readings, which are more sensitive to IFT differences. Table 1 displays the density difference for the blue filter readings between all the low and the high samples. It can be seen that, for all the sam- ples, the Status I polarized density reading is consistently higher. Second most sensitive response is with the polarized FIGURES 8 AND 9. Spectral reflectance of silver metallic colors with a polarized (left) and an unpolarized filter (right). TECHNOLOGIES & TECHNIQUES
Sustainable Fall 2009