Given information that Pantone palletes will be removed from Adobe software libraries this March, and Pantone focusing on promoting their Pantone Connect extension subscription model, i was wondering if anyone heard anything about it regarding Corel software.
If the Pantone color libraries are not removed from the impending release of CorelDRAW 2022 I figure it will only be a matter of time before they are removed. Give it a few months or maybe a year. But we'll have to see what kinds of consequences take place in March and the months following that after Pantone's color libraries are removed from Adobe software.I don't know what Adobe, Corel or any other vendor is having to pay Pantone to bundle those color libraries into the graphics software (or even if they're paying Pantone anything at all). Whatever the terms may be I think Pantone, X-Rite and the higher ups who own those companies are making a really stupid mistake by letting those libraries be removed from Adobe's software. I can't see this being a good thing at all for Pantone. I think they're taking a big gamble and it's going to backfire on them.Pantone is not the only color library standard. There are other spot and process color systems available (and bundled into many graphics applications, such as CorelDRAW). I always looked at the existence of those color libraries within software like CorelDRAW as a form of advertising. Pantone makes a bunch of its money selling physical swatch books and other kinds of products. The little color palettes within graphics applications are a way to sell those physical products. If those Pantone electronic swatch libraries are removed from the applications it's going to make Pantone a lot less visible. Pantone may end up seeing sales levels of their physical products drop.Some users will be forced to pay $60 per year per computer to use the Pantone Connect service. But I think a great deal of users will just adapt around the removal. Some users may put the Pantone color palettes in the nice to have but do not need category. Thanks largely to the Internet many companies already use RGB, CMYK or even L*a*b values to describe the official colors of their branding in addition to Pantone values. With Pantone's swatches removed from Adobe's applications it may lead to many firms to just stop using Pantone in color specifications. Adobe claims they're developing some kind of work-around, but no details have emerged about that yet.
Bobby Henderson said:Whatever the terms may be I think Pantone, X-Rite and the higher ups who own those companies are making a really stupid mistake by letting those libraries be removed from Adobe's software.
I can envision the executives at Pantone convincing each other around a boardroom table that they are providing essential, critical, and irreplaceable technology. To the point where they think they have a monopoly on color.
Pantone has a good and unique business, but seeking predictable ongoing revenue through a curiously expensive subscription model is excessive. Perhaps they have too many staff to feed (100+ staff) and are frantically trying to justify keeping everyone.
I'm wondering if it would be considered a kind of anti-trust violation if Adobe introduced its own spot and process color libraries. They still haven't mentioned details of their work-around. A new color library system could be a possible work-around.
Bobby Henderson said:A new color library system could be a possible work-around.
Great point... and Adobe has the cash resources to do that. Literally start fresh.
Plus... they could even market Adobe-branded swatch books and color scanning equipment, to have a comprehensive in-house solution.
The Adobe Integrated Color Accuracy Systemᵀᴹ
OK, I just made that up.
If Adobe is irritated with Pantone? Adobe can bury them in 5 years - or at least cause huge damage.
I wonder kind of production costs are involved in making the spot and process color swatch books sold by Pantone (and others). Pantone recommends you replace the swatch books at least once a year. But when a package of Pantone Plus Series spot color swatch books (coated and uncoated) costs $150-$200 or more most people will keep them quite a bit longer. It would be interesting if Adobe could sell a similar product for considerably less money.
For a long time Pantone had a pretty stable list of spot colors. In recent years they've gotten into the habit of adding a few more colors each year, probably as another way to push people into updating their swatch books. My workplace has to have those things on hand. I'm jealously protective of mine. From time to time various people want to "borrow" those swatch books, be it a customer or a co-worker who works out in the fabrication shop or on one of our install/service trucks. Nope. They don't leave my desk.
I believe Adobe will get a slice of the Pantone pie. Access via their applications to get your pallette gives them a slice. Corel and all others may go the same way.
Technology it will be a mess for awhile. Pantone standardized on LAB conversions for all their palettes so new development is not a problem technically.
However as an example if you dump Pantone but want to create a color pallette with colors, say Pantone 286, that have equivalent LAB, grayscale, RGB and CMYK values (which you must do to have a viable pallette) where does that intersect and cross the boundaries of intellectual property.
Would it be a violation to even call it an equivalent? Would any colors that convert to identical values in LAD, RGB and CMYK as Pantone colors do be a violation?
The technical issues of RIP conversion has to be addressed for older and newer applications. Then users, some use the LAD default, others RG and CMYK.
I think there are paths Adobe (or others) could follow to develop a rival spot/process color library to Pantone. There are already rival companies offering swatch books and digital palettes bundled into software, Trumatch being one example. So Pantone doesn't own that entire concept.
It's doubtful Pantone could try to claim ownership of specific LAB color values, such as the value used to describe Pantone 286 Blue. A color is just a color. On the other hand, if Adobe simply made a carbon copy of Pantone's colors and just changed the naming I think they would get into legal trouble.
The situation may have similarities to how typefaces are legally protected. A typeface designer or foundry can't copyright or trademark the actual shapes of letter forms. This is why we have various visual clones of Helvetica, such as Swiss 721 or Nimbus Sans. But the name of the typeface can be copyrighted or trademarked. The digital font data is very much copyright-able. If a rival type company tried to re-sell Monotype's Helvetica Now font files under a different typeface name they would get into a lot of trouble. That's what happened to a junk fonts company in the early 1990's when they tried to re-name and re-sell Adobe's Font Folio fonts as their own product. You can legally make a visual clone of a typeface, but that typically involves drawing up the letter forms from scratch and doing all the kerning work from scratch as well. Helveti-clones mostly look identical to each other, but they'll vary to some surprising degrees when the letter forms from different clones are laid on top of each other. Even the "legit" versions of Helvetica have many subtle and not so subtle differences. The 1983 "neue" cut of Helvetica is very different from the original 1957 version. The recent "now" version is unique as well.
If Adobe were to develop its own color library system it would have to be distinguishable from Pantone's products. There are considerable gaps in Pantone's spot color range, the color spread is not all that even. A hypothetical Adobe color library could address that.
Ok look at it this way, Pantone developed and owns their color and documented the LAB conversion process. It then could be argued, that the LAB equivalent of all Pantone colors are Pantone property. If that happens and the logic of that is undeniable, how would any company create a competing pallette?
You can only get there through LAB.