Michael Magers wrote:
I read once that you can put the monitor in a color space but the image is not. Then edit it from there.  That way when you do do the conversion to CMYK there are no surprise's.

proofing, very handy. View>proof setup

works better when you have the icc profile of the printer.

Michael Magers wrote:
Here's how I would do it.

I would retouch the image in RGB then convert to the  of the printer then run a curve or fine tune anything else from there.

I read once that you can put the monitor in a color space but the image is not. Then edit it from there.  That way when you do do the conversion to CMYK there are no surprise's.

$.02  on the table.

This works best for me as well.

Robert Randall wrote:
I work in CMYK all day long.  All of my raw conversions go into Colormatch RGB and then into any number of preset seps. When using the Leaf software, I go directly into CMYK from raw. I am charged with matching product color to contract proofs, and I can't think of any shortcuts to help you with. You either know the stuff or you don't. Experimenting on your own will take about 6 months to a year to figure it all out, and you'll need to produce a gazillion Approval of Fuji proofs to check all your moves.

And I'm still reading that book... But what do you suggest as far as CMYK settings and UCR/GCR settings? For some reason I'd think if I converted the file that I'd fuck up something like that and have to go back to square 1.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

And I'm still reading that book... But what do you suggest as far as CMYK settings and UCR/GCR settings? For some reason I'd think if I converted the file that I'd fuck up something like that and have to go back to square 1.

Chapter 5 page 106 has a temporary fix for a custom CMYK. Yea Andrew its that book.

Michael Magers wrote:
Chapter 5 page 106 has a temporary fix for a custom CMYK. Yea Andrew its that book.

Different book.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

And I'm still reading that book... But what do you suggest as far as CMYK settings and UCR/GCR settings? For some reason I'd think if I converted the file that I'd fuck up something like that and have to go back to square 1.

Convert to your printing purpose (sheetfed coated, uncoated, web....), then set the highlight and shadow numbers to correct the file and send it off to the printer. If you know the substrate, adjust the gain accordingly, if you don't, tell the printer you set it to default and let him worry about fixing it. The biggest positive thing you can do is bring the black point into balance and not screw up the white point. Everything else is contrast control of individual channels and color tweaks to match product.

Robert Randall wrote:
Convert to your printing purpose (sheetfed coated, uncoated, web....), then set the highlight and shadow numbers to correct the file and send it off to the printer. If you know the substrate, adjust the gain accordingly, if you don't, tell the printer you set it to default and let him worry about fixing it. The biggest positive thing you can do is bring the black point into balance and not screw up the white point. Everything else is contrast control of individual channels and color tweaks to match product.

So another dumb question, made dumber to make a point...

What is the worst thing someone can do in RGB or some form of RGB before sending it off to the printer?

Myshkin wrote:
proofing, very handy. View>proof setup

works better when you have the icc profile of the printer.

I work as a prepress technician at a local sheetfed shop so maybe I can help out.....

Very good advice, use the proof function insider of photoshop and make sure it is configured correctly.
Using the correct profile is key to getting the correct prevew / soft proof. Select a CMYK profile, "US Coated Sheetfed V2"  is a good start, but this should be setup to your printers standards, more on the below. Make sure you use a coated or non coated profile, there is a huge difference in color gamut on an uncoated sheet (especially the cheap stuff).

Lastly, check "Black Point Compensation" and "Simulate Paper Color" in your customize proof settings

Now when you hit preview......Close Your Eyes!!! , if you flick it on and off, your eyes will say, wow that looks horrible, my printed piece look waaay better than that, but it really doesn't. It's also setup to match a hardproof in a lit viewing box. Keep in mind your monitor must be calibrated and able to produce the entire CMYK spectrum to view faithfully.

You can cycle Cmd/Ctrl - Y to preview back and forth while your still in RGB mode (or another CMYK profile)




More details....

Call your print supplier and ask them what standard they have there shop setup to, and what profile you should use for the best soft proof.

Print shops rarely have there own custom icc profile, as this leads to problems matching another press if its rerun on another press. Instead we use industry standards based off of ISO 12647-2  and make the press and proofer match those. My shop used the Gracol 06 standard, and we prefer to receive files in CMYK since we do not do Hexachrome or hifi printing.

*Edit....Wow you guys are fast posters

Adam Brodzinski wrote:
and we prefer to receive files in CMYK since we do not do Hexachrome or hifi printing.

different thread.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

So another dumb question, made dumber to make a point...

What is the worst thing someone can do in RGB or some form of RGB before sending it off to the printer?

One of the smarter questions actually.

The worst thing you can do in RGB is show your client a full blown wide gamut saturated to the nines file that can't be reproduced in print because the colors are so completely out of gamut. You will look like a complete moron by the time the prepress house is done with you, and your client will likely never return for a repeat performance.

Robert Randall wrote:

Convert to your printing purpose (sheetfed coated, uncoated, web....), then set the highlight and shadow numbers to correct the file and send it off to the printer. If you know the substrate, adjust the gain accordingly, if you don't, tell the printer you set it to default and let him worry about fixing it. The biggest positive thing you can do is bring the black point into balance and not screw up the white point. Everything else is contrast control of individual channels and color tweaks to match product.

So it sounds like you are responsible for doing all this for your clients and deal with the printer directly, but is it usually the photographer that has this much responsibility? I know submissions to mags are requested in rgb even though many of them print in cmyk. I assume they have the techs do the conversion? Do you ever hand over cmyk files to any client without knowing where the printing is being done?

Myshkin wrote:

So it sounds like you are responsible for doing all this for your clients and deal with the printer directly, but is it usually the photographer that has this much responsibility? I know submissions to mags are requested in rgb even though many of them print in cmyk. I assume they have the techs do the conversion? Do you ever hand over cmyk files to any client without knowing where the printing is being done?

I'm somewhat of an anomaly in that I was classically trained as a union apprentice in a prepress house. Many of my clients use me to produce retouched CMYK files for print instead of sending them to a prepress house. They feel I bring a greater sense of art content than the technicians at the prepress houses. In a number of instances they send me files that other photographers have provided to them instead of awarding those files to the prepress house. There are a number of engravers in Chicago that don't like me very much.

Most photographers are over their waders in this subject, and they aren't really expected to know the workflow. But... you still need to know what you can't reproduce in print if you expect to keep your clients happy.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:
Anyone have real world examples on how to retouch with print in mind?

So let's say I'm shooting a job that I know will go to some kind of cmyk or low gamut output. This could be a billboard, printed piece (newspaper, mag, etc). How can I keep the output in mind during retouching to make it both look better as well as to give the printer and pre-press department an easy time.

Are there any tricks?

Any color space I should work in?

Anyone have examples?

Just a few quick ones....

Communication -- When sending in your artwork to the printer, leave your name, email and or number, on the CD, file info etc... in case prepress needs you to resend a file. It gets interesting going from the shop to marketing salemen, to customer, to artist.... a lot of things can get mis-communicated and costs time.

If working in RGB, keep an original and duplicate & flatten a version just for CMYK output. This gives you a version to apply print oriented sharpening etc...

Read this pdf on tweaking your CMYK image to really maximize the color fidelity of your image. The process of converting light to pigments (RGB to CMYK) isn't always perfect, and can leave you with a lifeless image.
Plate Blending by the Numbers

Well I need to get a few hours of sleep, gotta go into work early tomorrow to make a deadline, seems like where going to have a drive through window real soon

i'll try to think of some good ones and post tomorrow evening.

Robert Randall wrote:
Most photographers are over their waders in this subject, and they aren't really expected to know the workflow. But... you still need to know what you can't reproduce in print if you expect to keep your clients happy.

And just to comment, this is why I started the thread - Not to make all of us experts, but to give us some info as far as what we can do to make things easier down the line and make our clients happy.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:
Anyone have real world examples on how to retouch with print in mind?

So let's say I'm shooting a job that I know will go to some kind of cmyk or low gamut output. This could be a billboard, printed piece (newspaper, mag, etc). How can I keep the output in mind during retouching to make it both look better as well as to give the printer and pre-press department an easy time.

Are there any tricks?

Any color space I should work in?

Anyone have examples?

is it going to newspaper or magazine or billboard?

all of them have different outputs, as an example for newspaper you should use north american prepress with the 20% desaturate checked off

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

Different book.

What book? "Getting it Right in Print?"

Star wrote:

is it going to newspaper or magazine or billboard?

all of them have different outputs, as an example for newspaper you should use north american prepress with the 20% desaturate checked off

Why should you do this?

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:
And just to comment, this is why I started the thread - Not to make all of us experts, but to give us some info as far as what we can do to make things easier down the line and make our clients happy.

This is part of the questions asked at a client/agency/art dir meeting, 'what format' i.e RAW, Tiff, RGB ect they wish to have.
If a direct client is unsure then talk to their printer.
Many advertisers will use multi media, print and web so there's not much point in giving them a print proof cmyk file.

Art dir don't just create ideas print knowledge is big part of their job.

No different from a decorator asking what colour or finish, matt, silk you'd like your bathroom.

Star wrote:
is it going to newspaper or magazine or billboard?

all of them have different outputs, as an example for newspaper you should use north american prepress with the 20% desaturate checked off

Robert Randall wrote:
Why should you do this?

OK, I'll tell you why this is a huge mistake and you would never do this when going out to newsprint.

North American Prepress uses Web Coated as its default separation. Newsprint is not coated, it is toilet paper. It will absorb most of the ink you lay down on it creating a pile of mush that the press operator will hang you with because the coated setup allows for a lower dot gain number.

Web coated also allows for 300% total ink coverage, while most news papers want you to stay between 200% and 240% total ink coverage. If you used North American Prepress for your default, the pressman would be forced to stop his presses and re-do the plates with your images on them. He would remove your images and continue printing blank spaces where your images used to reside. You would be charged for all the extra work, the down time, the overtime and for the ad space. You would lose your client and probably your life savings, noting that newspaper press runs are pretty costly endeavors and making a mistake of that proportion would bankrupt most normal small businesses.

Most press houses have automatic preflight software, so the possibility of your errant sep making it onto press is pretty slim, but when they spot the flaw, they will do one of two things. They will either change the sep to usable parameters, thus insuring your pictures look like crap because you didn't get the chance to adjust color to the new setup, or they will pull the images and leave blank spaces, thus insuring your client will hate you.

As an aside, the reason the pressman would have to halt the press is because the ink would be laid on so heavy for the substrate that it wouldn't dry. On a sheetfed press, this causes things like offset in the stack at the end of the press, which will ruin the printed pieces. On a high speed web presses, ink that won't dry causes paper tears, clogging, broken roller bearings, broken cylinders, etc. All very costly nightmares, and all because your job specks were off.

Lastly, the check desaturate box... I'm not sure from the wording if Star meant to check the box or leave it unchecked. Do not put a check in that box unless you know how to color correct by the numbers. Putting a check in that box basically eliminates the WYSIWYG aspect of your workflow, and the monitor will not match your output device.

Studio 144 wrote:
More printing companies really need to switch to a color managed workflow and only bind to CMYK when they are making the plate!

What does this have ANYTHING to do with retouching a file in a way that makes going to cmyk easier?

Robert Randall wrote:
Why should you do this?

Because that is how the art director I work for preps his files for layout. He is rather standard in his field. I have worked for two others, from the same media group but different papers, who also use the same work flow.

Sometimes knowing how to person you are handing the files off to does his prep work is the best way to make sure your work will look as close as possible to the original once it is out of your hands.

Another point in proving that Bob is not omniscient.

That is why the first part of the post asked what the end product was.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

What does this have ANYTHING to do with retouching a file in a way that makes going to cmyk easier?

Well it has a lot to do with the process. You simply retouch in RGB then when the plate is made the RIP uses the correct profile for the press/stock and makes the best possible CMYK conversion for that device. If the image is going to be used in different printing processes you don't have to have a CMYK version for each. The CMYK image for newspaper (SNAP) is much different than the one for web offset (SWOP).

We have moved away from the closed loop of color correction to a open loop. Printing companies need to understand that.

Studio 144 wrote:
Well it has a lot to do with the process. You simply retouch in RGB then when the plate is made the RIP uses the correct profile for the press/stock and makes the best possible CMYK conversion for that device. If the image is going to be used in different printing processes you don't have to have a CMYK version for each. The CMYK image for newspaper (SNAP) is much different than the one for web offset (SWOP).

We have moved away from the closed loop of color correction to a open loop. Printing companies need to understand that.

So how can I make a file that will give the print company the best possible CMYK conversion?

Star wrote:

Because that is how the art director I work for preps his files for layout. He is rather standard in his field. I have worked for two others, from the same media group but different papers, who also use the same work flow.

Sometimes knowing how to person you are handing the files off to does his prep work is the best way to make sure your work will look as close as possible to the original once it is out of your hands.

Another point in proving that Bob is not omniscient.

That is why the first part of the post asked what the end product was.

Sometimes you say the dumbest damned things, which surprises me, because at times you seem so smart.

When it comes to print, there aren't many that know more than me, so it isn't a matter of omniscience, its simply a matter of knowledge. If your art director is using a web coated separation to send off to a newspaper for publication in a newspaper, he is a dumb ass, and while that often times appears to be the norm or standard in the industry, it still isn't correct. Fortunately, prepress houses usually employ some form of automated preflight to catch all those nagging mistakes that art directors frequently make, which is more than likely why your art director continues to get away with print suicide.

You handing them what they ask for is correct, only because its the workflow they demanded of you. But, you announcing in a public forum that it is the way to do things, is at minimum, a poorly informed decision.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:
So how can I make a file that will give the print company the best possible CMYK conversion?

Well today most printing company still require the designer to supply CMYK images. Communications with the printer is the key to success. You have to ask them what they want. They should know their dot gain and what ink coverage they can handle. Many printer and publications will supply a color profile for their presses.

When you are not sure what company will be printing the image you can only go by standards. If you are doing magazine work generally you will be using the SWOP (coated or uncoated) again for newspaper work you generally want SNAP.

So you find out what profile you need to use then edit checking often with color preview function in Photoshop set to your output profile. Once you are done with the file use convert to profile to do the CMYK conversion.

Studio 144 wrote:
More printing companies really need to switch to a color managed workflow and only bind to CMYK when they are making the plate!

Tell you what, lets you and I work on the same file in what ever RGB color space we decide is appropriate. I'll pick Color Match.

You send your file out for a Kodak Approval proof in its native RGB format, and let the sep house move it into CMYK for the proof. I'll turn my file into CMYK when I deem appropriate, and I'll  then color and tone correct it to correspond to whatever press conditions we agree on, lets say sheet fed coated.

I will bet you everything I own, including all cash assets, that my picture will look better to everyone than yours will. Mine will be brighter that yours, it will have better contrast than yours, and the colors will sing compared to yours. And all of this will be due to how I manipulate the file after it has been separated. That is why they don't automate the workflow from RGB right to a plate rip.   

However, as soon as guys like you, that don't have a clue about the process, demand in a loud enough voice that they do implement the process you desire, it will happen. And then images will get just a tad crappier looking.

Robert Randall wrote:

Tell you what, lets you and I work on the same file in what ever RGB color space we decide is appropriate. I'll pick Color Match.

You send your file out for a Kodak Approval proof in its native RGB format, and let the sep house move it into CMYK for the proof. I'll turn my file into CMYK when I deem appropriate, and I'll  then color and tone correct it to correspond to whatever press conditions we agree on, lets say sheet fed coated.

I will bet you everything I own, including all cash assets, that my picture will look better to everyone than yours will. Mine will be brighter that yours, it will have better contrast than yours, and the colors will sing compared to yours. And all of this will be due to how I manipulate the file after it has been separated. That is why they don't automate the workflow from RGB right to a plate rip.   

However, as soon as guys like you, that don't have a clue about the process, demand in a loud enough voice that they do implement the process you desire, it will happen. And then images will get just a tad crappier looking.

LOL!

Studio 144 wrote:
There is nothing better than closed loop color! Tweaking an image for a given output is the finest way to do color. The issue is in today market place and with today deadlines it is almost impossible to close the loop.

Let try to send your file to a half dozen printers to meet the deadline and then try to send my file and average the quality of the final images.

Oh, by the way I grew up over my family's print shop was deviling presses before I started kindergarten. I have worked as a process camera man, scanner operator, pressman and etc. I have my BS in printing management and I teach graphic commutations at a university. So you are probably right about me not knowing anything!

So there is nothing at all we can do to a file in rgb mode or anything to better prep it for cmyk printing?

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

So there is nothing at all we can do to a file in rgb mode or anything to better prep it for cmyk printing?

Simply put the biggest mistake I see people make with rgb is using really bold and beautiful saturated colors that look wonderful on the monitior, but are so far out of gamut that it is impossible to do in reality...one thing i always do is have the cmyk info window open.  The numbers in that are of course based on what cmyk conversion you have set up in your color setup, so pick that first...keeping those numbers in gamut will go a long ways to producing a solid image.  Also check your white and black points...while your monitor may show detail at 250 rgb, when converted to cmyk it may end up with almost no dot, making it look blow out....to be "safe" try around 235 for the highest white point with detail (yes I know, it could go higher, but this is a "safe" area")...for shadows to play it safe stay over 10 for detail, maybe even a little bit more (shadow points is very, very dependant on final print media)

And like someone else said, DO NOT SHOW A CLEINT A HIGHLY SATURATED INKJET PRINT FROM YOUR EPSON PRINTER WITHOUT SOME SORT OF COLOR MANAGED CMYK SETTING APPLIED.

Inkjets can produce color well outside the range of cmyk.  The coated papers are often optically brightened...etc...your print may look spectacular, but when it's printed...well,  yeah, they will never match...

ebarb wrote:

Simply put the biggest mistake I see people make with rgb is using really bold and beautiful saturated colors that look wonderful on the monitior, but are so far out of gamut that it is impossible to do in reality...one thing i always do is have the cmyk info window open.  The numbers in that are of course based on what cmyk conversion you have set up in your color setup, so pick that first...keeping those numbers in gamut will go a long ways to producing a solid image.  Also check your white and black points...while your monitor may show detail at 250 rgb, when converted to cmyk it may end up with almost no dot, making it look blow out....to be "safe" try around 235 for the highest white point with detail (yes I know, it could go higher, but this is a "safe" area")...for shadows to play it safe stay over 10 for detail, maybe even a little bit more (shadow points is very, very dependant on final print media)

And like someone else said, DO NOT SHOW A CLEINT A HIGHLY SATURATED INKJET PRINT FROM YOUR EPSON PRINTER WITHOUT SOME SORT OF COLOR MANAGED CMYK SETTING APPLIED.

Inkjets can produce color well outside the range of cmyk.  The coated papers are often optically brightened...etc...your print may look spectacular, but when it's printed...well,  yeah, they will never match...

Very good points!

c_h_r_i_s wrote:
And after all this work you submit pic to a printer for a mag run and what do they do ? run an average of all the pages not individual images.

So don't be dissapointed with what you see in print when you've given them a perfect image.

that's a good point, if everyone was submitting their own cmyk files. But most mag submissions want rgb, unless someone can clarify that for me?