Don't Get RIPed Off

Buying a RIP? May sure you understand all the issues involved. We've assembled a panel of experts to answer some common questions.

Remember back when RIPing a file meant tearing a manila folder in half? Graphic arts terminology has come a long way. Who even bothers to say "raster image processor" any more? It's much easier to say "RIP." If only it were just as easy to buy one.

As RIP technology has advanced, a number of issues have surfaced, forcing in-plant managers to do some deep thinking before opening their wallets. To help you understand some of these issues, we've gone right to the main RIP vendors with our questions. Providing the answers are:

• Steve Musselman, Agfa senior U.S. marketing manager for CTP systems

• Johan Rommelaere, BARCO Graphics marketing manager

• Bill Cotton, ECRM marketing analyst

• Arlene Karsh, Harlequin product marketing manager for ScriptWorks

• George Walter, Heidelberg USA product manager, output systems

• Peter Gorgone RamPage Systems director of marketing

• Tom Yang, engineering manager of the product division of Dainippon Screen Engineering of America.

IPG: What RIP features and functions do you consider important for imagesetting?

Agfa: Although a major task of the traditional RIP has been to interpret incoming PostScript pages, within Agfa's new Apogee workflow, we have moved the interpretation to our Apogee Pilot module which normalizes incoming PostScript and PDF files into a common internal file format: PDF. This now leaves the RIP the task of processing engine-specific tasks.

BARCO: Late binding is extremely important since this feature allows for real last-minute changes. Late binding should be for pages in imposition schemes and images and other objects in the pages.

Screen-based DGC (Dot Gain Compensation). For each screen used in the imposition flat, a dedicated DGC table must be possible.

True transparency support simplifies and speeds up trapping and avoids interpretation mistakes between design and production.

Screen type or angles selection per object. An object can be a page, image or any element within a page. This makes it possible to avoid local moiré problems All these features are available with Barco Graphics' FastRips.

ECRM: While bells and whistles are nice, don't overlook basic RIP characteristics such as stability, flexibility, and performance. Helpful features include soft or on-screen proofing, easy font handling and reprint or bitmap storage capability.

Harlequin: High-quality color work for brochures and color ads demands good screening and color management. Because some in-plant shops often handle so many different imaging applications, one of the most important features a RIP can have is the flexibility to handle a variety of file formats and accommodate a variety of different workflows.

Heidelberg: Important features include:

High-quality screening. Ultimately, output quality is the key, and with different screening possibilities, HQ, Diamond, IS, and Delta can provide beautiful output.

OPI. It is important to keep the high-res files secure, but not have to pass them around as you trap and preview. Send them with the file only when it finally goes to output.

Efficient Workflow. The RIP should allow you to manage jobs via priority and be automatically trapped if requested, or sent directly to a proofer. The workflow should also allow you to do some functions off-line and send them to output later.

RamPage: In-RIP trapping tops my list with regard to features, but not at the expense of an open architecture. The RIP should work with legacy equipment and with the imaging device you want to install today or in two or three years. You don't want to retrain personnel or scrap equipment in order to take advantage of a more efficient recorder.

Screen: Important features include:

Being able to output the RIPed file again to the same device without reRIPing it.

Ability to view the RIPed file before outputting to a recorder.

The RIP should provide extra gray level (more than 256) to enhance the output quality.

Ability to combine several pages before output to a recorder.

Compensation for press gain.

Ability to auto separate a composite input file during the RIPing process.

IPG: How important is RIP-once-output-many (ROOM) capability?

Agfa: Very important; however, in Agfa's Apogee workflow, we refer to this model as NORM (Normalize Once, Raster [or render] Many). By interpreting the files up front in the process you are dealing with "flattened" or highly normalized PostScript pages, which can pass through the RIP with no surprises to the user. This is essentially the goal in a ROOM workflow: to instill confidence that the page content passed through one device (a proofer for instance), correctly anticipates the output from the subsequent imagesetter or platesetter.

However, each marking engine has it's own rendering requirements, such as color space, resolution, screening and orientation. Therefore, in a NORM workflow, the file is interpreted (normalized) once, and then this common master is accessed and processed to meet specific engine requirements, without impacting the page content.

By working from this one normalized master page, and then sending that interpreted page through to a variety of interim engines (monitors, contract proofers, imposition proofers), there is confidence that what you see is what you really get—no surprises.

BARCO: This is only a difficult way to cope with RIPing inconsistencies. Barco Graphics uses the concept of a RIP family to get consistency among the different RIPs used for checking (viewing, proofing) and final output. This concept gives much greater flexibility and speed during the production process.

ECRM: In my opinion, ROOM capability is a term often misapplied. The basic need is to guarantee consistent results between on-screen proofs, digital color proofs and final film or plate. Rasterization implies device dependency. Resampling is a form of rasterizing. Many systems claiming ROOM capability are actually normalizing or distilling, not RIPing. Given the speed of today's RIP platforms, having to reRIP will not incur a large time penalty and should produce matching output, as long as the same interpreter is used.

Harlequin: ROOM is important, but its utility is limited to specific applications. For the ROOM approach to be successful, the output from every target device must be truly identical. In other words, the content, color, fonts and page geometry must all be a perfect match.

The biggest advantage of the ROOM paradigm is that, at least in theory, the same data is being sent to every output device, so inconsistencies such as font substitution and image replacement problems do not occur. However, when a job is rendered to a device-specific image, a number of device-specific processes are applied to it, including resolution, color management, device calibration and screening.

To use the output generated for one device on a different device, this processing must be undone and redone for the new target. This reprocessing can threaten data integrity, create an extremely large intermediate data file, and introduce errors and artifacts. Even when sending the same data, some artifacts, such as moiré patterns, will not be seen on devices that utilize alternate screening technologies.

Heidelberg: ROOM technology is a key to improving workflow. More and more, we see jobs going through multiple processes before finally going to output. They are trapped, proofed, impositioned, and even archived. By implementing the ROOM concept, you are assured that the data is secure and will be predictable throughout the entire process.

RamPage: Large-format imaging, whether on film or direct to plate, increases the cost of mistakes. The only way to reliably catch them is with a "RIP-once" workflow. For CTP, ROOM is critical. For imposed films, ROOM is critical to controlling costs.

IPG: Is PDF compatibility really an important concern or is it overemphasized?

Agfa: PDF is the industry standard of tomorrow, whether we like it or not. Anyone who downloads files from the Internet can attest to its proliferation, regardless of its adoption by our industry. As print becomes just one manifestation of a document, rather than the ultimate goal, it is important to be able to work with a common format.

One issue to consider in document distribution is color-space: the output vehicle may not perceive CMYK, but RGB, or maybe even hexachrome.

Another aspect to consider is the built-in ability of PDF to manage the revision cycle; since Agfa's internal file format is this PDF file, incorporating revised pages into an existing pool of processed pages is an important capability, as well as the ability to use off-the-shelf editing plug-ins.

BARCO: Data consistency is the most important concern. If PDF can contribute to that then it is important. However, in a CTP environment, data import compatibility of the system (with PDF and other data formats) together with the ability to mix them on one flat, like with BARCO's FastLane systems, are of more importance.

ECRM: With the exception of Ad Send, I don't see a big rush to PDF just yet. That could change whenever the few shortcomings with the format are dealt with. Being somewhat of a Mac fan, I would like to see a Chooser level PDF driver that used PAP and allowed for input of job ticket information.

Harlequin: PDF as a file transport format is well suited to general document processing and other black-and-white work, but it still is not adequate for quality color printing applications. Until the market fully embraces PDF as the primary file format in use, we at Harlequin will continue to view it as only one of many file formats that the RIP needs to accommodate.

Heidelberg: PDF has had a slow start, but so have all of the new standards. We see PDF as growing in importance, and an effective way to transfer files. It is critical for Heidelberg to be PDF compatible in order that we can provide our customers with the ability to handle the widest variety of jobs that their customers send them.

RamPage: If your customers are demanding that you accept PDF files, it's an important concern.

Screen: PDF is an important element today and will be very important for future work flow issues.

IPG: Is RIP speed as important as buyers think?

Agfa: Pure RIP speed remains important to today's consumers, since engine imaging speed seems to know only the boundary of how fast can your processor properly develop the film. Agfa's Avantra 25XT can image over 80 newspaper pages an hour—provided the RIP can keep up with it. However, it's not just the speed of the RIP, but the power of the RIP. With the Apogee system, you can network multiple RIPs into our output manager, so no matter how you overburden the RIP, you can keep the imagesetter/platesetter running via multiple RIPs on-line.

BARCO: Yes, RIPs can be the bottlenecks for feeding the CTP engines in time. The longer the RIPing takes, the longer these times will be.

ECRM: RIP speed is always a concern, especially with high-res output above 2,000 dpi. A complex job may still take a Pentium II or G3 chip 20 minutes to render a four-color page.

Harlequin: Right now, there are RIPs that can run faster than some imaging engines. But in general, RIP speed remains advantageous, and it's critical for users with sufficient volume and imaging rate to benefit from features such as pipelining and symmetrical multiprocessing, or SMP, which takes advantage of multi-processor server configurations.

Heidelberg: Job types vary, resulting in different RIPing times. However, we find that more often than not, the jobs are waiting in the queue for the imagesetter to finish outputting. Some complex jobs are RIP intensive, but for most jobs current RIP speed seems more than adequate.

RamPage: It's important, but too often buyers measure RIP speed too narrowly. A valid benchmark has to take into account how long the Mac is tied up when queuing the file, trapping speed, correction cycles, remakes, troubleshooting files with missing elements or extraneous inks, and so on. When you evaluate a RIP, develop two benchmarks: one that measures flat-out RIP speed and one that throws a few curve balls into the mix. The RIP's ability to deal with a broader slice of the production cycle will drive productivity up and costs down.

IPG: What is the value of incorporating additional prepress functions (e.g. trapping, imposition) into a RIP?

BARCO: Ideally all processing should be done in the RIP, in where the processing is defined by a set of parameters (including imposition and tuning data). This would give the customer the flexibility to make last-minute changes by only changing parameters. However, this will have cost and/or speed consequence in the RIP. The more processing the RIP needs to do, the slower the RIP will be or the more powerful/costly RIP hardware will be needed. For CTP this would require expensive RIP hardware.

Late binding however, does not necessarily need more processing power. When efficiently implemented it can speed up RIPing, as with the FastRip of Barco. Without late binding, large imposition files need to be generated requiring extra processing time and storage requirements. Moreover, each time a change is needed, this processing needs to be done over again. Late binding gives printers great flexibility for last-minute changes.

ECRM: If the functions are automated, they can save some platform costs. But a so-called "single box configuration" can become a nightmare. If the particular function requires an operator, I'd give it a separate station.

Harlequin: Building color management, trapping and other functions into the RIP allows labor-intensive tasks to be performed automatically and facilitates the ease in which job changes and changes in workflow strategies can be made at the last minute.

Heidelberg: By including trapping and imposition into a process, you move the job through quicker. You also can predict the output more accurately because the trapping is done on secure data after it is RIPed. The same with imposition. If you trap or impose and then RIP only to find you have to retrap, you have to go all the way back and, when done, reRIP.

RamPage: This is Manufacturing 101: any time you can get a machine to perform a labor-intensive task, the value is proportional to the amount of time your organization spends on that particular task. Suppose you have three operators at $25/hour who each spend about 10 hours a week trapping manually; you're spending $3,000 a month on trapping. Divide the cost of the RIP by $3,000 and you start to see the payback period based on one variable, in this case, trapping.

Another important consideration is to perform certain tasks, whether automatic or manual, at the right point in the "assembly line." If processing happens upstream on the systems used for retouch, page assembly, and so on, you're keeping people from doing their jobs, which drives your labor costs upward. By pushing separation, trapping, preflight and other operations downstream into the RIP, prepress personnel can accomplish more.

Screen: It is a necessity now to have prepress functions in the RIP.