Support NeoGAF

[UtadaBarkley]

Okay, so I'm sending these album covers to the printers within the next week, and I just finished up the design and submitted it. The printer sends it back and says everything looks A-OK except for the fact that the black levels on the images need to be in a "rich black" format.

Now I'm pretty quick to learn when it come sto things like this, but I can't for the life of me figure out how to convert the black in my images to "rich black". Apparently the black levels I've been using are just plain RGB black, and "rich black" is actually CMYK levels of 40, 30, 30, 100 respectively. How do I alter a PNG or EPS image to do this? Anyone know?

 

[xsarien]

Okay, so I'm sending these album covers to the printers within the next week, and I just finished up the design and submitted it. The printer sends it back and says everything looks A-OK except for the fact that the black levels on the images need to be in a "rich black" format.

Sweet, I didn't Spinal Tap had gotten back together.

 

[Birbo]

Hope this helps:

http://marvin.mrtoads.com/richblack_vs_plainblack.html

In print there are many different ways to represent black. The simplest is "plain black," or 100% black ink (0C, 0M, 0Y, 100K). However, you can also create a "rich black" by printing other inks along with black. There are many different possible ink combinations - the most common "rich black" contains percentages of all 4 inks: 63C, 52M, 51Y 100K. This particular variant owes it's popularity to Adobe Photoshop - when an RGB file is converted to CMYK, areas that are absolute RGB black (R0, G0, B0) will wind up with this combination, unless certain default settings have been changed. Other possible flavors of "rich black" are "Cool Black" (could be 60C, 0M, 0Y, 100K) and "Warm Black" (could be 0C, 60M, 30C, 100K).

The problem with all these blacks is that they all look the same on the computer screen - all of them are represented as R0, G0, B0 - but they WON'T look the same on paper. A classic beginner's mistake is to take a photoshop image that fades into rich black on all sides, place it in a picture box in the page layout software, and assign the picture box a background of "black" ["black" in page layout software = plain black]. This appears to be continuous and uniform on the computer screen. If the layout were to be printed, however, there would be a distinct difference between the areas of rich black and plain black.

 

[demon]

wtf is "rich black"

 

[UtadaBarkley]

Hope this helps:

http://marvin.mrtoads.com/richblack_vs_plainblack.html

In print there are many different ways to represent black. The simplest is "plain black," or 100% black ink (0C, 0M, 0Y, 100K). However, you can also create a "rich black" by printing other inks along with black. There are many different possible ink combinations - the most common "rich black" contains percentages of all 4 inks: 63C, 52M, 51Y 100K. This particular variant owes it's popularity to Adobe Photoshop - when an RGB file is converted to CMYK, areas that are absolute RGB black (R0, G0, B0) will wind up with this combination, unless certain default settings have been changed. Other possible flavors of "rich black" are "Cool Black" (could be 60C, 0M, 0Y, 100K) and "Warm Black" (could be 0C, 60M, 30C, 100K).

The problem with all these blacks is that they all look the same on the computer screen - all of them are represented as R0, G0, B0 - but they WON'T look the same on paper. A classic beginner's mistake is to take a photoshop image that fades into rich black on all sides, place it in a picture box in the page layout software, and assign the picture box a background of "black" ["black" in page layout software = plain black]. This appears to be continuous and uniform on the computer screen. If the layout were to be printed, however, there would be a distinct difference between the areas of rich black and plain black.

Birbo: Very informative information. Do you know where I go in PS to convert my RGB file to CMYK? Actually nevermind, it would probably help if I just follow that article's instructions. THANK YOU!

 

[Battlezone]

Do you know where I go in PS to convert my RGB file to CMYK?

Image > Mode > CMYK

I assume you're sending these files to a professional printer, yes? It's usually better to send them as CMYK files, because they're probably just converting them once they receive them.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

Image > Mode > CMYK

I assume you're sending these files to a professional printer, yes? It's usually better to send them as CMYK files, because they're probably just converting them once they receive them.

They want to charge me $50 bucks to convert the black to "rich black" so I def wanna do it myself...

So I just take the image file, and follow the above steps to do this? That will convert it? Does it matter which image format it is?

 

[Battlezone]

Let's start from square one. What format is the image saved in? The most common formats are JPG, TIF, and PSD (Photoshop's native format). Most printers will accept files in one of those three formats. TIF is probably the best-and what I use for my work.

If the file is saved as one of those three formats, then using the steps I noted above will convert the image to a CMYK file. Once it's converted, you should be able to change the blacks in your image.

PM me if you need any additional help...

 

[Outcast2004]

The best and easiest way to send a file to a printer is as a PDF format.

Useable to just about everyone.

I work in the printing industry, so if you have ANY questions, feel free to ask me. I do prepress and graphic design for a living.

Like th eabove poster stated start at square one. I need the details for the project, what program it was built in, size, resolution and the like.

If they are charging you $50 for a rich black conversion they are fleecing you. It's literally a 5 second job using Acrobat and/or Pitstop.

 

[Burger]

Those steps will convert your document into CMYK color mode.

All this does is say "This is how I want my colours represented using CMYK inks" as opposed to "This is how my colors should look using RGB light".

Convert it to CMYK, then grab the eyedropper tool and click on some of your blacks. Have a look at the CMYK sliders (window/color - option arrow/cmyk sliders) and check the numbers, if they are close, then great.

If not you'll have to play around with your levels, curves and color balance to get the colors right.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

I knew GAF would come through for me... For the final format, the image is saved in a PDF format for the printers, I distilled it to PDF.

Square one:

I started my design by taking pictures for the album cover with a 5 megapixel digital camera, the images were saved in .JPG format, they were about 5 megs a piece.

I used Macromedia Fireworks to compose my layout, organizing the pictures along with the necesarry text. This was saved in a .PNG format 300 dpi.

Then, I used an .EPS template my printer provided me with, and imported the pages for my cover art into the template, saving it once again as an .EPS file.

Last but not least, I used the Adobe Acrobat distiller, to convert the .EPS file to a .PDF file.

So I'm guessing the problem reverts back to the .PNG file? Should that be the point where I should have converted my blacks to "rich black"?

What files would you guys need to do it for me? The PNG? If it doesn't take long, I'm guessing you guys could do that for me, and I could list yoru name in the "Special Thanks" section of our album cover.

 

[Burger]

The fileformat has little to no bearing on your colors (unless your embedding ICC profiles and such).

Just open the file you gave the printer, fix the colors, and resave. There should be no reason to convert your EPS to PDF, as most likley you are compressing your image down using Jpeg compression.

As a rule, save big rasterised pictures out as .tif

 

[Outcast2004]

Bruger is right.

it all starts back at the photo process. usualy only worry about rich blacks in the ayout and no so much the pictures.

If you email me the PDF I could pick it apart much easier and pick out any problems a prepresser may have.

I'll preflight it and find out what needs to be fixed.

EDIT: just thought of this. Your template you use, dont save t out as an EPS. By convertinng you just compress things even more and it's a unneccesary step. Take you template and save it out as a .ps (postscript) and distill at the highest settings.

As for building your pages and such you should really use something a little more widespread like Quark or InDesign. that may help with the color issues as all programs handle color differently.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

The fileformat has little to no bearing on your colors (unless your embedding ICC profiles and such).

Just open the file you gave the printer, fix the colors, and resave. There should be no reason to convert your EPS to PDF, as most likley you are compressing your image down using Jpeg compression.

As a rule, save big rasterised pictures out as .tif

my printer says they need it is a pdf to follow with their workflow... i know it didn't make sense to me, but they said that's what their printer reads... in fact the pdf file looked visually like sh*t to me (grainy, etc), but they say that once it prints it'll look identical to the .eps file.

Okay, so file format doesn't matter....

 

[Outcast2004]

if your PDF is coming out grainy then it's how you are saving it out. For your purposes at least 300 to 500 dpi, no compression, CYMK and the rest.

Make sure your distiller is set at a "press quality" setting. Why they told you to save it as an EPS and THEN convert it to a PDF is beyond me.

You can go straight to a press usable PDF and be done with it.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

if your PDF is coming out grainy then it's how you are saving it out. For your purposes at least 300 to 500 dpi, no compression, CYMK and the rest.

Make sure your distiller is set at a "press quality" setting. Why they told you to save it as an EPS and THEN convert it to a PDF is beyond me.

You can go straight to a press usable PDF and be done with it.

I had the distiller set on the highest quality, and it still looked like utter crap, maybe it's just my monitor? Check your PM, I sent you the links to the files for you to examine. the rep at the print shop said he printed out a proof of the PDF, and it looked fine.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

EDIT: just thought of this. Your template you use, dont save t out as an EPS. By convertinng you just compress things even more and it's a unneccesary step. Take you template and save it out as a .ps (postscript) and distill at the highest settings.

As for building your pages and such you should really use something a little more widespread like Quark or InDesign. that may help with the color issues as all programs handle color differently.

I wholeheartedly agree. I was just stupid and used Fireworks becasue that's what I'm familiar with. Ths situation has really opened my eyes with regard to that program's limitations. Programs liek Photoshop and the like intimidate me with their vast array of options, and unfriendly UI.. I guess I just nee dto stop ebing scared and learn it though.

The reason I saved as an EPS and then a PDF is because the PDF distiller only reads .PS and .EPS files (as far as I could tell). It wouldn't ready the .PNG format I had my image saved in, and Fireworks doesn't save in .EPS or .PS format.

 

[Outcast2004]

Ok.. right off the bat here.

The color is VERY washed out, it will look even worse on a glossy type of stock (which I'm assuming you're printing on).

Take your original images back into Photoshop, make sure they are CYMK first, then add some contrast to them. Some "snap", if you will. They all look rather dull. They alll look like RBG images that were forced to CYMK during the distilling process. Tif or JPG images are usually the best to stick with.

You want the pics to reall stand out.

Ok as for the rich black. The printer is talking about the widespread areas of flat black you have in the background. That will print like a dull, dark gray. A pure black just doesn't work on a glossy stock.

Take all those flat black areas and add some cyan, magenta and yellow until they are a DARK black. Ask the presss what THEY consider a dark black, differs between printers.

Here at Harmon Homes we have a unique setting for newsprint, glossy stock and the others.

PS: I did a preflight, and many of your pic come up at 72 DPI. this is where their grainness comes in. These need to be MUCH higher in resolution, nothing below 150. Larger images like your cover should be AT LEAST 600 DPI.

The images are also coming through as Indexed CYMK (bad), they should be just CYMK.

 

[Birbo]

Sometimes things look goofy on screen but print out fine. I'd ask the printer for a color proof before you pay for anything.

 

[Outcast2004]

birbo, this situation is exactly the opposite... looks to printout fine (on our laserjet color proof), but the PDF looks like poo.

It'd be fine if he were printing on only copy paper, but thats no the case.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

Ok.. right off the bat here.

The color is VERY washed out, it will look even worse on a glossy type of stock (which I'm assuming you're printing on).

Take your original images back into Photoshop, make sure they are CYMK first, then add some contrast to them. Some "snap", if you will. They all look rather dull. They alll look like RBG images that were forced to CYMK during the distilling process. Tif or JPG images are usually the best to stick with.

You want the pics to reall stand out.

Ok as for the rich black. The printer is talking about the widespread areas of flat black you have in the background. That will print like a dull, dark gray. A pure black just doesn't work on a glossy stock.

Take all those flat black areas and add some cyan, magenta and yellow until they are a DARK black. Ask the presss what THEY consider a dark black, differs between printers.

Here at Harmon Homes we have a unique setting for newsprint, glossy stock and the others.

PS: I did a preflight, and many of your pic come up at 72 DPI. this is where their grainness comes in. These need to be MUCH higher in resolution, nothing below 150. Larger images like your cover should be AT LEAST 600 DPI.

The images are also coming through as Indexed CYMK (bad), they should be just CYMK.

WOW. I'm extremely discouraged now... LOL...I don't even know where to start. Thats the downside of running an indie label, you gotta be everything, art designer/producer/engineer, etc. I'm good in other areas, but I admit I'm not a great graphics designer...

Okay a quick page by page breakdown:

Front page: Thats' fine I'm guessing? or is this an instance where I need to add color to the black?

Back Page: Same deal, I'm guessing?

Left Inside: All of those little pics are washed out? take them out and add contrast to them as normal images, and then re-import?

Right Inside: Add contrast?


*bangs head against monitor* lol....

 

[UtadaBarkley]

birbo, this situation is exactly the opposite... looks to printout fine (on our laserjet color proof), but the PDF looks like poo.

It'd be fine if he were printing on only copy paper, but thats no the case.

Exactly, I was telling the printer, there is NO way this PDF is gonna priint out good, it looks liek CRAP. but then he assured me that the only problem he saw from a color gloss proof was just the black levels....

 

[gblues]

As an Acrobat expert (Adobe Certified Expert in Acrobat 6.0, natch), what distiller settings are you using? You damn well better be using "Press" because "Screen" will downsample all your images to around 72 dpi.

If you're using Press, then Fireworks is probably downsampling your images (since it isn't happening at the Distiller stage). Use a real layout program.

If you're not crunched for time, I can do the layout work for you. E-mail me the original version of the PDF (the one that looks like crap) and the original photos, template, etc. My e-mail is gblues AT gmail DOT com.

Nathan

 

[Birbo]

D'oh!

Love to see what it is you're working on. Seems you're in very capeable hands.

 

[UtadaBarkley]

Check your PM's. You too Birbo