EP1673226B1 - Procede et dispositif pour controler des resultats d'impression - Google Patents

Procede et dispositif pour controler des resultats d'impression Download PDF

Info

Publication number
EP1673226B1
EP1673226B1 EP04786766A EP04786766A EP1673226B1 EP 1673226 B1 EP1673226 B1 EP 1673226B1 EP 04786766 A EP04786766 A EP 04786766A EP 04786766 A EP04786766 A EP 04786766A EP 1673226 B1 EP1673226 B1 EP 1673226B1
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
suspect
benefit
multiple copies
repeat
benefits
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Revoked
Application number
EP04786766A
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Other versions
EP1673226A1 (fr
Inventor
Sören SPRINGMANN
Kerstin Münker
Dirk Lütjens
Ansgar Kaupp
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Eyec GmbH
Original Assignee
Eyec GmbH
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Family has litigation
First worldwide family litigation filed litigation Critical https://patents.darts-ip.com/?family=34314991&utm_source=google_patent&utm_medium=platform_link&utm_campaign=public_patent_search&patent=EP1673226(B1) "Global patent litigation dataset” by Darts-ip is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Priority claimed from DE10361543A external-priority patent/DE10361543A1/de
Application filed by Eyec GmbH filed Critical Eyec GmbH
Priority to PL04786766T priority Critical patent/PL1673226T3/pl
Publication of EP1673226A1 publication Critical patent/EP1673226A1/fr
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of EP1673226B1 publication Critical patent/EP1673226B1/fr
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical
Revoked legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B41—PRINTING; LINING MACHINES; TYPEWRITERS; STAMPS
    • B41F—PRINTING MACHINES OR PRESSES
    • B41F33/00—Indicating, counting, warning, control or safety devices
    • B41F33/0036—Devices for scanning or checking the printed matter for quality control

Definitions

  • Corresponding reports can also be checked in continuous printing processes such as gravure printing (decor printing), web offset or continuous roll flexographic printing (label production, film printing).
  • gravure printing decor printing
  • web offset continuous roll flexographic printing
  • label production film printing
  • the invention proposes a method for checking printed results, in which first a rapport, for example recorded by a scanner, is then selected on the repeat located benefit and the selected benefits are compared with a template.
  • the term "benefit selection” includes in particular a recording of the individual benefits by a data processing system, which makes it possible to further process the individual benefits separately or to compare each individual benefit with a template.
  • a benefit selection is thus a process in which a report is divided into different areas, each representing a benefit, and the totality of the objects, such as the entirety of the corresponding pixels, of each of these areas is a common one Action can be subjected.
  • Such a benefit selection can in particular capture the number of benefits of the repeat and their position.
  • a benefit such detects that these are available to the benefit of the data processing system.
  • the data processing system is enabled for the first time to independently check the quality of a benefit within certain limits, that is to say in the context of previously specified parameters, and to mark at least suspected points to a user.
  • a very large number of benefits can be tested relatively reliable.
  • a manual intervention for benefit selection can be dispensed with, which usually proves to be relatively expensive and thus, in particular for a large number of uses, as unsafe for operation.
  • a utility-dependent transformation such as a matrix, which in addition to the position also includes a scaling, relocation or the like, can be determined for each individual benefit.
  • a utility-dependent transformation such as a matrix, which in addition to the position also includes a scaling, relocation or the like, can be determined for each individual benefit.
  • linear or nonlinear distortions in particular of benefit to use, can thus be detected directly, as long as a corresponding utility selection is even possible.
  • Such a benefit selection is particularly advantageous over a mere geometric marking of a benefit, which is then transferred by linear transformation to the other benefits, as a benefit as such can be selected and "recognized" by the data processing system, as will be explained in more detail below.
  • the benefit selection preferably takes place automatically, which can be realized, for example, by searching a recorded area for repetitive patterns. This is preferably not done with the highest accuracy, so that individual errors do not affect the benefit selection.
  • an optional manual or semi-automatic benefit selection is also conceivable. In particular, under adverse operating conditions, however, an automatic benefit selection, in particular accompanied by an automatic benefit detection, is preferable.
  • the selected benefits are compared with the template only after the benefit selection, wherein, depending on the specific embodiment of the invention, for example already during the benefit selection, a pre-comparison can be carried out within certain limits, which serves for the selection of the individual benefits.
  • the latter can be done for example by comparing the template with individual areas of the repeat under a relatively large tolerance threshold. In this way, a particular area of a repeat can be defined or selected as a benefit if it matches the template within the corresponding tolerance threshold.
  • a benefit identification can also be carried out for the benefit selection.
  • the term “recognition” refers to a conversion of the graphical features of an image or an image area at least into a form that can be stored by a data processing system, that this image or the relevant area as a specific object, such as a benefit or can be defined as a template, wherein for the implementation substantially or even only information from the corresponding image or the corresponding field are used.
  • the recognition of the benefit can include an assignment of the individual components, for example the individual pixels, of a benefit to a benefit specific origin or of a benefit specific coordinate system of the respective benefit.
  • the respective benefit appears as an independent object and is defined out of itself; a process that can accordingly also be called “recognition” of a benefit.
  • a process that can accordingly also be called “recognition” of a benefit For example, in such an approach then variations in the distances between the individual benefits play no role, since the benefit recognition each defines a benefit out of itself, for example, such a benefit on a rapport, or on another area, by a pattern recognition as an independent entity is determined and localized.
  • Such an approach has, in particular, the advantage that areas not recognized as constituents of a benefit are also not included in the review, so that the review is much more targeted.
  • such a utility identification may also include a benefit-dependent transformation, such as a matrix, between the respective utility and a template.
  • a utility-dependent transformation can, in addition to the position, which can already serve a benefit selection, also comprise a scaling for the respective benefit.
  • this scaling may comprise rotation, translation and distortion components, wherein preferably threshold values are indicated, from which such components are marked as possible errors (suspicions) on the part of the data processing system.
  • threshold values can be specified, from which such components are compensated by the data processing system, so that such a deviation of the printed image does not impair a check by an examiner, since he does not receive these deviations at all.
  • a presentation threshold from which a benefit regarding the corresponding components is represented unscaled, and a marking threshold above which the benefit is marked as suspicion due to a high translation, rotation or distortion with respect to the template can be provided, wherein depending on the specific embodiment - the presentation threshold and the marking threshold can be selected differently or the same.
  • Such a scaling makes it possible to separate production-related or, for production, but tolerable, product fluctuations of intolerable product defects.
  • the visual detection capability of an examiner can be relieved by compensating for such tolerable scaling errors.
  • the present invention also proposes an apparatus for checking printed results comprising an image capture device such as a scanner, a computing device, and a user interface having at least one display and one input, and characterized by a benefit recognition module for the utility residing on a scanned report for the purpose of selecting the benefits of the repeat, this benefit recognition module comprises a pattern recognition.
  • the term "scanner” or the terms “scan” or “scan” are to be understood in their most general form and include all possibilities with which a graphic or other printed object, photos or similar can be detected by a data processing system.
  • the template can also be displayed in a separate window. This makes it possible in particular to provide the template with the corresponding zoom factor, so that a detailed comparison with a single benefit or with a variety of benefits can be made.
  • a selected benefit is selected as a template. This approach leads cumulatively or alternatively because of the great match of color and print material between the then selected template and the other benefits to a significant reduction of the suspicion points to be examined in detail.
  • the actual assessment takes place, in which the status of a determined suspicion site is defined as a fault or as a credit institution, preferably means for identifying a suspected location as a fault or as a good place are provided.
  • label means an assessment of a suspected listing and an assessment of the rated suspected lot with a label corresponding to that rating.
  • suspicion site can be activated or addressed via the input. Through such activation or addressing, certain operations can then be performed only for this suspicion site. For example, a mark can be made as a good or error location for a suspicion site addressed in this way, if a corresponding input to be made is "good location" or "error location”. It is also possible to scroll from an activated suspicion site to a non-activated suspicion site by activating this, until then not activated, suspicious site, while deactivating the previously activated suspicion site. This allows for a very quick evaluation of the individual suspicion points and thus increases the reliability and efficiency of the audit.
  • suspicion points can optionally be activated by suitable measures, so that, for example, in the case of a "serial error", ie in the case of a recurring error, the corresponding suspicion points simultaneously can be edited or evaluated. As a result, the cost of such "serial errors" significantly reduced.
  • the benefits are marked in the display according to the status of their suspected locations. This can be done, for example, in such a way that a benefit that has no suspicion points or only good points is marked as good. Accordingly, utility in which a suspect has not yet been evaluated may be marked as unrated, while a benefit comprising at least one flaw may be marked as faulty. In this way, the auditor gains an immediate overall view of all the benefits.
  • a consistent representation is selected for the suspicion sites - and for the usage marker, for example red for defective benefits or defects, green for good benefits or good offices and orange for unrated suspected funds or benefits that contain an unrated suspected entity.
  • the device according to the invention can have a zoom mode in which several benefits are partially and almost identical This allows an efficient comparison of a specific location in different uses, in particular in order to determine a possible source of error efficiently.
  • a visualization of the work progresses in the benefit selection.
  • an auditor can see to what extent the automatic work processes for benefit selection have progressed, whereby he can bridge a relevant waiting time suitable.
  • both procedural steps preferably follow independently of each other, so that the benefit selection can proceed faster than the suspicion site determination.
  • a corresponding visualization can be effected, for example, by a bar or a graduated disk or the like, which is shared with increasing progress of the suspect location determination in accordance with the number of benefits that are processed in the suspicion site determination.
  • Each benefit can then be assigned a corresponding part of the work progress visualization. Accordingly, then a color choice can be made in which, for example, a corresponding part is marked in orange, if a certain benefit still has unweighted suspected sites.
  • a corresponding representation can also be used as well-valued benefit or as defective assessed benefits to the corresponding parts of the work progress visualization.
  • a test device may preferably have a toggle mode, in which at least two windows or at least one utility and a template or another utility can be displayed one above the other and alternately in the foreground.
  • a toggle mode in which at least two windows or at least one utility and a template or another utility can be displayed one above the other and alternately in the foreground.
  • a barcode check can be provided. This can in particular be designed so that all benefits are checked for the existence of barcodes and - in the event that barcodes are found - their readability is checked.
  • barcodes generally also include the corresponding code in alphanumeric form, the correct contents of the barcode can also be checked by means of a text recognition function. Deviations can then be output as suspicion or error points. Under certain circumstances, however, the substantive check can also be made by comparing the respective barcode with a separately entered check digit.
  • Such a barcode check possibly including a substantive check, is also advantageous regardless of the other features of the present invention.
  • a scanner is checked for contamination before or after reading in a repeat.
  • a corresponding module of the test device can be used, which initiates, for example, a scanning process at given times and in this case first checks whether there is still a repeat in the scanner, which is possible, for example, by attempting a utility selection. If this is not the case, deviations from a blank space are searched for and communicated as soiling. In this way it can be ensured that the number of suspicion points, which are only due to the inspection process, is reduced to a minimum, which is advantageous regardless of the other features of the present invention.
  • FIG. 1 schematically illustrated process sequence is first recorded a rapport in the present embodiment.
  • this can only be scanned.
  • the benefits located on this repeat are selected, in which, for example, a pattern identifier is used to recognize recurring patterns on the repeat with the aid of a certain tolerance threshold and to record them in such a way that the benefits are available as individual objects but in their entirety to the corresponding data processing system.
  • the corresponding template can be included. This can for example come from an electronic file. On the other hand, it can also be scanned.
  • one of the selected benefits as a template, as shown by the dashed arrow.
  • the data processing system can compare the benefits and the submission and, as explained in detail below, suspicious or faulty points are marked and evaluated.
  • FIG. 2 shows a display or a section 1A, which can be used for scanning a multiple benefits or labels 2 comprehensive repeat 3 or for scanning or loading a template 30.
  • Corresponding fields 31, 32 and 33 can be used to start the corresponding processes in the hardware on which the method is based, such as, for example, a computer with a scanner become.
  • fields 34 and 35 are available with which the orientation can be changed in each case.
  • an image processing function, with which parts of the original 30 are removed and, with the aid of the field 37, selected individual regions of the repeat 3 can be copied into the original page, is beyond the field 36.
  • Field 38 has a dual function. On the one hand, a template selection can be initiated via the "Start evaluation" command. This has in the presentation after the FIG. 2 not yet taken place. With this benefit selection, recurring patterns can be determined in the report and from this the individual benefits can be recorded in their position. In the present embodiment, a frame is then placed around the thus selected benefits.
  • a troubleshooting is initiated by the field 38, in which are determined by the data processing system differences between the individual benefits and the template.
  • user selection and comparison can take place immediately one after the other and for the user as one work step.
  • the comparison it is preferable to switch over to a display for checking the comparison result, so that a check by the user can start immediately, even if the data processing system has not yet automatically compared all the benefits.
  • the progress of this comparison can be communicated to the user, for example by a bar or even by the display only of the already automatically compared benefits.
  • FIGS. 3 to 6 is a display or a section 1 of a display, which can then be used to test a multiple use or labels 2 comprehensive repeat 3, and a corresponding legend 4 shown.
  • the repeat 3 comprises nine labels 2 (numbered only by way of example).
  • the detail 1 has an overview window 5 as well as two detail detail windows 6, 7.
  • four types of representation can optionally be selected. These relate, on the one hand, to the presentation of the template ( FIG. 5 ) or the label ( FIG. 4 ) and the other representation of the repeat with the individual labels 2 in an overall view (this possibility is in the FIG. 3 shown) or with an identical magnification view per label ( FIG. 6 ). You can switch over active areas 8 between the individual view types.
  • the activatable by the active areas 8 representations "label” or “template” allow - due to the window 5 - a detailed review of a particular benefit (eg benefits 9) or the template 40.
  • a detail check can be facilitated (toggle mode).
  • the representation as a report facilitates an overall overview, in order to be able to evaluate the test result or progress of the test appropriately. In this case, in particular representation in magnification is advantageous to a To be able to look at certain fault points comparatively on several benefits without further effort and in a particularly clear way.
  • window 6 is a detail of the template can be seen, while in the window 7 a detail of the check label is shown. In the present embodiment, a detail of the label 9 is shown in the window 7.
  • the enlargements in the windows 6 and 7 as well as the relative positions of the detail enlargement are selected identically in the windows 6 and 7, so that a corresponding suspicious place can be checked clearly.
  • the present representation corresponds to a process status in which a repeat has already been scanned and the benefits 2 of the repeat 3 have been selected.
  • a suspicious site identification has already been carried out, at least in part, in which labels 9, 10 and 11 have been identified.
  • a certain suspicion rating - where practicable by a data processing system - made, by register fluctuations and squirts, if they are below a certain tolerance threshold, were not marked as suspected.
  • wrong fonts, wrong bold print, changed font extensions or missing special characters or accents can be recognized.
  • the identified suspicion points 12, 13 and 14 in the present embodiment have already been evaluated by a human examiner. This is in terms of the suspicion 12 of the label 11 as a fault by means of the mark 15 and at the suspicion point 13 of the label 10 as a good place by means of the mark 16th he follows.
  • the suspicion 14 of the label 9 is marked with a mark 17 as not yet evaluated.
  • the same marking is also found as a border of the window comprising the respective labels, so that this marking is clearly displayed to a user.
  • a corresponding marking is also found in the window 7, which represents the suspicion point 14 of the label 9 in the present embodiment.
  • the label 9 is active and can be characterized by pressing the fields 18 and 19 as good or as faulty. As soon as a corresponding identification has been made, this is indicated by a corresponding marking of the windows 7 and 9 as well as the suspicion mark of the suspicion site 14.
  • the section 1 can be operated by means of a mouse, not shown, but generally known, through which the fields 8, 18 or 19 or the windows 5, 6, 7 or the windows of the individual use, individual suspicion points or scroll fields 20, 21 are activated can.
  • the scroll fields 20 serve a jump from one benefit 2 to the next, each activating the next benefit.
  • the fields 21 make it possible to jump from one suspicion to the next suspicion, with an optional jump to the first suspicion or the last suspicion or a jump to the first suspect point of a currently active benefit can take place.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Image Analysis (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne des procédés de contrôle de résultats d'impression, consistant à scanner un rapport (3), à sélectionner des copies (9) présentes sur ce rapport (3) et à comparer les copies (9) sélectionnées avec un original (30). L'invention concerne également un dispositif de contrôle de résultats d'impression comprenant un scanner, un système de traitement de données et une interface utilisateur comportant au moins une unité d'affichage et une unité d'entrée. Ce dispositif se caractérise en ce qu'il comprend par ailleurs un module de reconnaissance de copies servant à reconnaître les copies (9) présentes sur un rapport (3) scanné. L'invention permet de contrôler de manière fiable et rapide une pluralité de copies (9).

Claims (14)

  1. Procédé pour contrôler des résultats d'impression, dans lequel un rapport (3) est d'abord dressé, puis les éléments utiles (9) figurant sur le rapport (3) sont sélectionnés et les éléments utiles (9) sont comparés à un modèle (30).
  2. Procédé selon la revendication 1, caractérisé en ce que la comparaison des éléments utiles (9) avec le modèle (30) s'effectue après la sélection des éléments utiles.
  3. Procédé selon la revendication 1 ou 2, caractérisé en ce que pour sélectionner les éléments utiles, on effectue une reconnaissance des éléments utiles.
  4. Procédé selon l'une des revendications 1 à 3, caractérisé en ce que les éléments utiles (9) sélectionnés sont représentés mis à l'échelle, de préférence lorsque les composantes de mise à l'échelle employés pour la représentation mise à l'échelle des éléments utiles (9), comme les composantes de rotation, de translation et de déformation, restent inférieures à une valeur seuil.
  5. Procédé selon l'une des revendications 1 à 4, caractérisé en ce qu'avec la sélection des éléments utiles, les différents éléments utiles (9) peuvent être représentés dans des fenêtres séparées (5, 6, 7) d'un affichage.
  6. Procédé selon l'une des revendications 1 à 5, caractérisé en ce que pour la comparaison entre les éléments utiles (9) et le modèle (30), une détermination des zones suspicieuses est effectuée, dans laquelle de préférence des zones suspicieuses (12, 13, 14) sont marquées et en particulier avant le marquage (15, 16, 17) de zones suspicieuses (12, 13, 14), des points de l'image suspicieux proches les uns des autres, sont réunis en une zone suspicieuse (12, 13, 14).
  7. Procédé selon la revendication 6, caractérisé en ce qu'un statut en tant que zone d'erreur, respectivement zone correcte, est ensuite déterminé pour au moins une, de préférence chaque zone suspicieuse (12, 13, 14).
  8. Procédé selon la revendication 6 ou 7, caractérisé en ce que l'ensemble des zones suspicieuses (12, 13, 14) doivent être évaluées avant qu'un protocole ne puisse être imprimé, respectivement que le contrôle ne puisse être achevé d'une autre manière.
  9. Procédé selon l'une des revendications 1 à 8, caractérisé en ce qu'on vérifie si un appareil de saisie d'images est sale ou non avant, respectivement, après la lecture d'un rapport (3).
  10. Dispositif pour contrôler des résultats d'impression comprenant un appareil de saisie d'images, un appareil de traitement des données ainsi qu'une interface utilisateur comprenant au moins un affichage et une entrée, caractérisé par un module de reconnaissance des éléments utiles pour des éléments utiles (9) se trouvant sur un rapport (3) scanné, lequel comprend une reconnaissance de modèle, pour sélectionner les éléments utiles (9) du rapport (3).
  11. Dispositif selon la revendication 10, caractérisé par des moyens de représentation des éléments utiles (9) reconnus dans des fenêtres séparées (5, 6, 7) de l'affichage et/ou des moyens de représentation d'un modèle (30) dans une fenêtre séparée (5) de l'affichage.
  12. Dispositif selon la revendication 10 ou 11, caractérisé par au moins une fenêtre multifonctionnelle (5, 6, 7), laquelle au choix, représente une pluralité d'éléments utiles (9) ou d'extraits d'éléments utiles (9), un élément utile (9) actif, respectivement, le modèle (30).
  13. Procédé selon l'une des revendications 10 à 12, caractérisé par une visualisation de l'avancée du travail lors de la sélection des éléments utiles (9), une visualisation de l'avancée du travail lors d'une détermination des zones suspicieuses et/ou une visualisation de l'avancée du travail lors d'une évaluation des zones suspicieuses.
  14. Procédé selon l'une des revendications 10 à 13, caractérisé par une représentation cohérente d'au moins deux catégories des catégories de zones suspicieuses (12, 13, 14) marquées, de zones suspicieuses (12, 13, 14) caractérisées, d'éléments utiles (9) marqués et de la visualisation de l'avancée du travail lors d'une évaluation des zones suspicieuses.
EP04786766A 2003-09-12 2004-09-13 Procede et dispositif pour controler des resultats d'impression Revoked EP1673226B1 (fr)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
PL04786766T PL1673226T3 (pl) 2003-09-12 2004-09-13 Sposób i urządzenie do kontrolowania wyników drukowania

Applications Claiming Priority (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE10342608 2003-09-12
DE10361543A DE10361543A1 (de) 2003-09-12 2003-12-23 Verfahren und Vorrichtung zum Prüfen von Druckergebnissen
PCT/DE2004/002045 WO2005025872A1 (fr) 2003-09-12 2004-09-13 Procede et dispositif pour controler des resultats d'impression

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP1673226A1 EP1673226A1 (fr) 2006-06-28
EP1673226B1 true EP1673226B1 (fr) 2012-03-14

Family

ID=34314991

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP04786766A Revoked EP1673226B1 (fr) 2003-09-12 2004-09-13 Procede et dispositif pour controler des resultats d'impression

Country Status (4)

Country Link
EP (1) EP1673226B1 (fr)
DE (1) DE112004001827D2 (fr)
PL (1) PL1673226T3 (fr)
WO (1) WO2005025872A1 (fr)

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE102017105704B3 (de) 2017-03-16 2018-08-02 Saueressig Gmbh + Co. Kg Verfahren zur Überprüfung einer Druckform, insbesondere eines Tiefdruckzylinders

Families Citing this family (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE102005037498A1 (de) * 2005-08-09 2007-02-15 Man Roland Druckmaschinen Ag Qualitätskontrollsystem für eine Druckmaschine
DE102005054975B4 (de) * 2005-11-16 2016-12-15 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Registerregelung bei einer Druckmaschine
DE102006050347A1 (de) 2006-10-25 2008-04-30 Siemens Ag Verfahren zum Prüfen eines Aufdrucks und Aufdruckprüfvorrichtung
DE102008049837A1 (de) 2008-05-27 2009-12-03 Eyec Gmbh Rotationsscanner sowie Verfahren zum Scannen eines Körpers und ein Verfahren zum Prüfen der Bedruckung eines Körpers

Family Cites Families (13)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE3713279C2 (de) 1987-04-18 1994-01-20 Laser Sorter Gmbh Verfahren zum Erfassen von Dimensionsfehlern und/oder dem Verzug von Papierbahnen oder Formatpapieren
DE4124397A1 (de) 1990-07-23 1992-04-02 Lehner Rolf Peter Verfahren zum erkennen von fehlern in bedruckten bahnen
DE4102122C2 (de) 1990-12-08 1994-02-17 Schoeller Felix Jun Papier Verfahren zur visuellen Kontrolle der Formation von einer in einer Richtung bewegten Bahn aus fotografischem Basispapier oder Basiskarton
DE4142481A1 (de) * 1991-08-12 1993-02-18 Koenig & Bauer Ag Qualitaetskontrolle einer bildvorlage z. b. eines gedruckten musters
WO1995011806A1 (fr) 1993-10-28 1995-05-04 Perretta Graphics Corporation Systeme de maintien de la densite de l'encre
DE19512501A1 (de) 1995-04-04 1996-10-10 Mohndruck Reinhard Mohn Ohg Personalisiertes Druckerzeugnis sowie Druckereianlage und Verfahren zu seiner Herstellung
EP0872810A4 (fr) * 1996-10-09 2000-04-19 Dainippon Printing Co Ltd Procede et appareil de detection de defauts de raies sur des documents imprimes
IT1292829B1 (it) * 1997-03-28 1999-02-11 Gd Spa Metodo e dispositivo per il controllo di banconote.
IT1306267B1 (it) * 1998-07-24 2001-06-04 Gd Spa Metodo e dispositivo di controllo di banconote
DE19939164B4 (de) 1999-08-20 2005-02-10 Koenig & Bauer Ag Verfahren zur Verarbeitung von Bedruckstoffen
JP3407112B2 (ja) * 2000-10-30 2003-05-19 株式会社東京機械製作所 刷版装着位置判定装置
KR100686291B1 (ko) 2001-04-11 2007-02-23 오렐 퓌슬리 지혀하이츠드럭 에이지 식별자를 갖는 용지를 사용하여 보안 문서를 인쇄하는 방법
DE10218062A1 (de) 2002-04-23 2003-11-13 Electrolux Home Prod Corp Rollenführung für insbesondere herausfahrbare Behältnisse von Haushaltsgeräten, insbesondere Geschirrspülmaschinen

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE102017105704B3 (de) 2017-03-16 2018-08-02 Saueressig Gmbh + Co. Kg Verfahren zur Überprüfung einer Druckform, insbesondere eines Tiefdruckzylinders
WO2018166551A1 (fr) 2017-03-16 2018-09-20 Saueressig Gmbh + Co. Kg Procédé destiné à contrôler une forme d'impression, en particulier d'un cylindre de rotogravure
RU2691292C1 (ru) * 2017-03-16 2019-06-11 Маттьюс Интернэшнл Гмбх Способ проверки формной пластины, в частности, формного цилиндра
US11135833B2 (en) 2017-03-16 2021-10-05 Matthews International GmbH Method for verifying a printing plate, specifically a gravure cylinder

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2005025872A1 (fr) 2005-03-24
PL1673226T3 (pl) 2012-09-28
DE112004001827D2 (de) 2006-06-29
EP1673226A1 (fr) 2006-06-28

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
DE69319219T3 (de) Vorrichtung und Verfahren zum Prüfen von Drucksachen
EP2463101B1 (fr) Système et procédé de production et d'inspection d'impressions dotés de contenus statiques et variables
DE102006056858B4 (de) Verfahren zum Überprüfen der Druckqualität
DE102012004238A1 (de) Druckverfahren und -system zur Ermittlung von Registerfehlern
DE60032413T2 (de) Automatisches Erkennen von Zeichen auf einem strukturierten Hintergrund durch Kombination der Hintergrundmodelle mit den Zeichen
EP2960058B1 (fr) Procédé et dispositif destinés à la commande générique et au réglage d'un processus d'impression numérique
AT501210B1 (de) Verfahren zur qualitätskontrolle an oberflächenvariablen drucksachen
DE102016204506A1 (de) Fortdruckinspektion mit lokaler Optimierung
DE69515476T2 (de) Verfahren und system zum überprüfen von druckaufträgen für anwendungen mit kurzen druckvorgängen
EP1727679B1 (fr) Procede d'identification d'un exemplaire individuel a image imprimee de qualite defectueuse sur une matiere imprimee comportant plusieurs exemplaires
EP1673226B1 (fr) Procede et dispositif pour controler des resultats d'impression
DE102011112232A1 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Erzeugung eines Barcodes auf einem Substrat
DE102009007864B4 (de) Druckbildabhängige Positionierung von Farbmess-Streifen
DE102008000031B4 (de) Verfahren zur Kontrolle einer Anordnung von an Formzylindern einer Druckmaschine angeordneten Druckformen
AT412675B (de) Verfahren zur qualitätskontrolle an drucksachen
EP3680106B1 (fr) Détection de moyenne en nombre mn dans l'image d'impression
EP3871892A1 (fr) Détection optimisée pour maculature
DE102019208257A1 (de) Druckqualitätsanalyse mit neuronalen Netzen
WO2012159602A1 (fr) Document de valeur et/ou de sécurité comportant une information codée
DE102018217476A1 (de) Variable Druckdüsentestmuster
DE10361543A1 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zum Prüfen von Druckergebnissen
WO2021224384A1 (fr) Procédé de gestion automatique d'erreurs d'une machine d'impression, et machine d'impression
EP3435056B1 (fr) Dispositif d'inspection de pression destiné à l'inspection optique d'une image d'impression d'un objet d'impression
EP1744881B1 (fr) Procede pour imprimer des produits d'impression individualises au moyen d'elements d'image imprimee logistiques
EP3104299B1 (fr) Production de marques a un stade preliminaire d'un processus d'impression

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20060412

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IT LI LU MC NL PL PT RO SE SI SK TR

17Q First examination report despatched

Effective date: 20060822

DAX Request for extension of the european patent (deleted)
GRAP Despatch of communication of intention to grant a patent

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNIGR1

GRAS Grant fee paid

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNIGR3

GRAA (expected) grant

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009210

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: B1

Designated state(s): AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IT LI LU MC NL PL PT RO SE SI SK TR

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: GB

Ref legal event code: FG4D

Free format text: NOT ENGLISH

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: CH

Ref legal event code: EP

Ref country code: AT

Ref legal event code: REF

Ref document number: 549164

Country of ref document: AT

Kind code of ref document: T

Effective date: 20120315

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: IE

Ref legal event code: FG4D

Free format text: LANGUAGE OF EP DOCUMENT: GERMAN

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R096

Ref document number: 502004013373

Country of ref document: DE

Effective date: 20120510

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: NL

Ref legal event code: VDEP

Effective date: 20120314

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: CH

Ref legal event code: NV

Representative=s name: E. BLUM & CO. AG PATENT- UND MARKENANWAELTE VSP

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: GR

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120615

Ref country code: FI

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: CY

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: PL

Ref legal event code: T3

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: RO

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

Ref country code: CZ

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

Ref country code: SI

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

Ref country code: EE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

Ref country code: SE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: SK

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

Ref country code: PT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120716

PLBI Opposition filed

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009260

PLBI Opposition filed

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009260

26 Opposition filed

Opponent name: KOENIG & BAUER AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT

Effective date: 20121213

26 Opposition filed

Opponent name: HEIDELBERGER DRUCKMASCHINEN AG

Effective date: 20121214

Opponent name: KOENIG & BAUER AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT

Effective date: 20121213

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: DK

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

Ref country code: NL

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

PLAX Notice of opposition and request to file observation + time limit sent

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNOBS2

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R026

Ref document number: 502004013373

Country of ref document: DE

Effective date: 20121213

BERE Be: lapsed

Owner name: EYEC G.M.B.H.

Effective date: 20120930

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: MC

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20120930

Ref country code: ES

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120625

PLAF Information modified related to communication of a notice of opposition and request to file observations + time limit

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSCOBS2

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: BE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20120930

Ref country code: BG

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120614

PLBB Reply of patent proprietor to notice(s) of opposition received

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNOBS3

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: AT

Ref legal event code: MM01

Ref document number: 549164

Country of ref document: AT

Kind code of ref document: T

Effective date: 20120913

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: AT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20120913

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: TR

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20120314

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: LU

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20120913

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: HU

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20040913

RDAF Communication despatched that patent is revoked

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNREV1

APBM Appeal reference recorded

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNREFNO

APBP Date of receipt of notice of appeal recorded

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNNOA2O

APAH Appeal reference modified

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSCREFNO

APBQ Date of receipt of statement of grounds of appeal recorded

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNNOA3O

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: FR

Ref legal event code: PLFP

Year of fee payment: 13

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: FR

Ref legal event code: PLFP

Year of fee payment: 14

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: FR

Ref legal event code: PLFP

Year of fee payment: 15

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: IE

Payment date: 20180920

Year of fee payment: 15

Ref country code: FR

Payment date: 20180924

Year of fee payment: 15

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: GB

Payment date: 20180924

Year of fee payment: 15

Ref country code: CH

Payment date: 20180924

Year of fee payment: 15

Ref country code: PL

Payment date: 20180828

Year of fee payment: 15

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R064

Ref document number: 502004013373

Country of ref document: DE

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R103

Ref document number: 502004013373

Country of ref document: DE

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: DE

Payment date: 20181001

Year of fee payment: 15

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: IT

Payment date: 20180928

Year of fee payment: 15

APAN Information on closure of appeal procedure modified

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSCNOA9O

APBU Appeal procedure closed

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNNOA9O

RDAG Patent revoked

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009271

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: PATENT REVOKED

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: CH

Ref legal event code: PL

27W Patent revoked

Effective date: 20181214

GBPR Gb: patent revoked under art. 102 of the ep convention designating the uk as contracting state

Effective date: 20181214

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: AT

Ref legal event code: MA03

Ref document number: 549164

Country of ref document: AT

Kind code of ref document: T

Effective date: 20181214