An Analysis of the Factors Influencing Paper Selection for Books of Reproduced Fine Art.

摘要

Toner-based digital presses are now capable of matching offset lithographic presses in image and print quality. Current trends show increased interest in printing fine art books on digital presses. It is necessary to understand the extent to which digital printing systems are capable of accurately rendering fine-art reproductions. This research analyzed paper properties that maximize image quality and preference for digitally printed fine art reproductions. Four images, representing four art media, were printed on twelve papers using two digital presses. The twelve papers represented different combinations of color, print-show-through, roughness and gloss. A psychophysical experiment was conducted in which observers ranked the twelve papers for each image on the basis of image quality, color rendering quality, and surface appearance quality. The results were analyzed and a model was developed to predict the probability that a paper was ranked in the top three. Paper color (coolness), basis weight, roughness, and gloss were model parameters. Unlike gloss, roughness, and print-show-through, there was no previous metric for quantifying coolness. Therefore, an additional experiment was conducted to develop a model to predict the perception of coolness using colorimetry. An alternative experiment model was also developed that included parameters such as caliper, print gloss, line raggedness, and dot circularity. The resulting models allowed for the optimization of paper parameters that maximize the probability a paper will produce preferred and high quality images. It was concluded that the probability a book was judged as having high image quality was optimized for papers with high coolness, low roughness and low gloss. Neither print show-through, line raggedness, nor mottle were significant factors. An additional lexical analysis was performed for observer descriptions of their ranking behavior. This analysis provided complementary data to the psychophysical results. Observers' descriptions of their ranking strategies did not match the rank data, suggesting a possible disconnect between observers' conscious and subconscious ranking behaviors.