WTF?
ask for a print profile.
Well, this is for the initial setup of the file before a print profile would be applied or even known. And to be honest, a lot of the time we don’t know who the client will have print a piece ahead of time, so we don’t always have access to a specific printer’s profile. 99% of the time we set it up as US Web Coated SWOP, which is what a lot of printers ask anyway.
We’re looking more for tips on creating a file that would have good initial values that would PRODUCE a very nice, rich, neutral-looking grayscale image.
Thanks.
black dominant CMYK gray file is what you want. Without knowing the details means trouble for your job.
Yeah, that’s basically what I’m after. The BEST method for creating a CMYK gray file that is neutral, but heavy in black.
I would imagine optimum numbers may be something like:
Blackest black: 50-60C; 45-55M; 45-55Y; 100K
Shadows: 40-50C; 35-45M; 35-45Y; 80-90K
Midtones: 10-20C; 8-15M; 8-15Y; 40-60K
Highlights: 0-6C; 0-4M; 0-4Y; 0-20K
These are total guesses, of course, but I assume this would provide decent results. A nice rich black in the darkest areas, with progressively less CMY in highlight areas (so black carries more of the load there).
Now, I’m just looking for a good workflow to produce this.
Thanks!
Well – what I usually do to have maximum flexibility in a file is to duplicate the Alpha Channel from the grayscale file, into a blank CMYK document of the same physical size and resolution. Load the Alpha as a selection and invert the selection as you are creating the selection. Create a color fill layer of 30c 20m 20y 100k as starting numbers and click ok.
You now have an image you can colorize in any way you wish by changing the values of the color fill. You may want to add an additional color fill layer of 0,0,0,0 underneath if you have transparency set in your preview. (aka the checkerboard.)
If you want to adjust tone, add a curves adjustment layer and set the blending mode to Luminosity so it does not shift the color – only the tone.
You could achieve what you want with two grayscale files: 1.) lightened; and 1.) regular curve adjusted. In my humble opinion, your numbers are a little too high. I’ve actually created some very nice neutral gray images using no black, but rather equal percentages of CMY. It depends on the final result you’re looking for, but if you create a swatch using 30%C, 30%M, and 30%Y, you’ll get a nice medium gray a tinge on the warm side ( which is why you’ll need the Black bump channel of approx. 15%K ). But the two GS images will make up the CMYK channels in your image file by using the lt. GS for the CMY’s and the adjusted GS for the K channel. If that ends up too warm, reverse the CMY’s with the adjusted GS file, and the lightened GS for the K channel. If that ends up too cold, you could experiment and channel mix by using the lt. GS file in the CMK and the adj. GS file in the Cyan channel, etc., etc., until you get the look you’re after. Unfortunately, if you’ve got alot of image files, it could be a bit time consuming in the long run. That’s why it’s important to iron out the channel mix and then try to automate the best you can.
"Well, this is for the initial setup of the file before a print profile would be applied or even known. And to be honest, a lot of the time we don’t know who the client will have print a piece ahead of time, so we don’t always have access to a specific printer’s profile. 99% of the time we set it up as US Web Coated SWOP, which is what a lot of printers ask anyway."
The problem with assuming any sort of profile is that if you’re wrong, it’ll never print neutral without messing with anything else on the run.
My approach and tools are a bit different. I’d start out with a properly toned grayscale image and then convert that to a custom profile for your press, but a custom profile with a heavy black generation – not the type you would want to use for general color seps, but one that puts most of the information into the black plate and automatically puts the right mix into the remaining channels for a good gray balance on that press.
If I have to assume a SWOP v2 profile, I’ll bring that profile into ProfileMaker and rebuild it with the required heavy black generation parameters, black start and ink limits I need. Of course, you need ProfileMaker or you need to know someone who has it and knows how to use it.
The images are probably currently either grayscale or RGB.
Keep them that way until the very end. You can’t mess with specific CMYK formulas until you know the final output. I recommend you Increase the canvas size of the original files and add some neutral swatches to the file, which you can use to monitor the numbers as you convert and tweak.
Remember, once you create your separations you’re at the mercy of the printer to hit the numbers to maintain neutrality.
Carl.
Well – what I usually do to have maximum flexibility in a file is to duplicate the Alpha Channel from the grayscale file, into a blank CMYK document of the same physical size and resolution. Load the Alpha as a selection and invert the selection as you are creating the selection. Create a color fill layer of 30c 20m 20y 100k as starting numbers and click ok.
Nice one, mo. I like.
Given that the ultimate output space is unknown, this seems to be the safest "middle-of-the-road" to shoot for.
Mo –
One question:
If the B/W appears on the same page as full 4/C 300% seps, is 170% enough ink to give it a rich black appearance?
Yes is the answer Rick, but you need to do some testing on the stock you are running the job on.
The next thing I was going to recommend that is more cost effective as well as flexible is to run a double hit black if the job will only be composed of these faux black and white images. You can adjust the 2nd hit black on press to tweak to your liking.
The next thing I was going to recommend that is more cost effective as well as flexible is to run a double hit black if the job will only be composed of these faux black and white images.
I assume you mean running this as a 2-color job: K+K
Yes. This was common practice in "the old" days. You may wish to tweak the second hit so you don’t muddy up the middle tones and highlights.
Neil
Yes –
OR
You can create a file that resides in total flux space. It’s an RGB image that consist of CMYK builds that you can change not only the numbers but the meaning of the numbers as well as adjust the numbers and the meaning of the numbers all in a non linear fashion ALL in one interface and in one color space. I call it color crack.
;o)
<
http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1gCewS5NoywYmecvV5 g3fFE5hxR4qu0>
And the tone curves reduce saturation? I can’t make the separations behave as the CMYK original (which I would think to be starting point). Can you explain a little furthur, MO?
I can send you the file if you want to play with it.
Thanks for all of the replies!
And Peter, I did try making a custom CMYK profile from within Photoshop that does have heavy black coverage. I actually manually adjusted the black curve to get a lot of the CMY out of the highlight areas as well. I named and saved this profile.
I’m sure this is not as controlled as ProfileMaker, but I don’t have that app. The one thing I’m not able to do with this method is adjust the level of Cyan in relation to Magenta & Yellow. It’s about 10% higher in most instances, but does look pretty neutral.
When I convert to CMYK using this profile, I do get the results I would like (the numbers all look great). But I have no idea whether the printer will respect this profile, or just convert to their own and mess everything up. I am trying to see if we can find out who the printer will be, then I just have to hope they are knowledgeable enough about these things to actually help. Many I’ve dealt with in the past really aren’t.
The other method that seems to work pretty well (though you have to tweak levels a bit more) is to use a Gradient Mask with the dark color being your ‘rich black’ and the light being white. This again gets all the numbers looking good throughout, you just have to adjust levels after.
photoshop.forums-at-gmail. com
When you choose Edit>Convert to Profile, towards the top of the pull-down menu is Custom CMYK where you get to fill in your own values. Here are the settings for a custom CMYK profile we use for magazine or offset printing (start from a grayscale image):
Ink Colors: SWOP (Coated)
Dot Gain: Standard 20%
Separation Type: GCR
Black Generation: Heavy
Black Ink Limit: 100%
Total Ink Limit: 300%
UCA Amount: 50%
You would have to adjust these settings for uncoated paper or newspaper, etc. The profile can be saved for future use with the Convert to Profile menu.
How did you get the "solid color" colors? Putting in 100,0,0,0; 0,100,0,0 etc results in a different set of RGB numbers. The RGB "crack" file doesn’t separate to CMYK the same as dropping in those CMYK masks in a file. I guess I’m just unclear what the goal of the "crack" file is. What about a positive mask of white solid color, on top of (and clipped to) the Cyan (set to multiply), set to screen. Wouldn’t that make the curves a little more intuitive?
<
http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1qsuP43F1xO1wLVxAz fx6Sjpy8uqe>
The RGB "crack" file doesn’t separate to CMYK the same as dropping in those CMYK masks in a file.
Correct. It is an example of me breaking Photoshops color management logic. You have to go onto the next step and extract the layers into a CMYK document and reassign the color fill value. Or extract the layer masks and stick them in spot channels made up of process colors in a Grayscale file.
The goal of the file is to show how screwed up color management is within Photoshop, but you can make new workflows with it.
Ok. I still stand by the positive mask idea as a potential good one. Any drawbacks?
Thanks, as always, MO.
Play with it and see what you come up with. Drawbacks? That’s subjective.
;o)
Hey MO can you email me that file I’d like to take a look at it.
Thanks Eilieen. I did something very similar to this. I just adjusted the black generation curve manually to get the CMY colors out of the highlight areas. When I set it like you have here, I get ONLY CMY in the highlights, and no black. I was under the impression that this had more potential to lead to slight color shifts on press due to the nature of color shifts with very small percentages of the colors.
– But you’ve had success with this? And do the printers appear to be respecting your profile and not converting it to their own, and in the process messing up what you’ve done?
– Any prepress or printer folks want to comment on this workflow?
I have tried some of the other suggestions in this thread, some just seem a bit convoluted to get the same ultimate result.
Thanks again!
Yes, the end result is the same. How much pain you want to endure until the job ships is the issue.
Hi Kenny,
The magazines we deal with all require PDFX1a files, which they appear to drop in exactly as supplied (many don’t even trap any more). We’ve been happy with the results from a variety of publications.
We also supply Press-Quality PDFs to most printers (with layout files and links as backup), and they appear to use them unchanged, except for trapping (can tell because the colour proofs show the file name and date that I generated). We generally use Prinergy PDF settings unless the printer gives us custom settings. Whether their PDF workflow does anything to alter the images is unknown, but the proofs appear quite close to the image on my calibrated monitor.
Now, whether the curves on the press itself match the colour proofs is another matter entirely… which is why we attend as many press checks as we can.
Hmmm. Interesting.
I followed your workflow.
1) Converted in Photoshop using custom profile. Everything looks great on screen, and numbers all look appropriate to what you think would be desirable.
2) Placed photo in InDesign using US Prepress defaults (which I assume most would use). This by default ignores the custom profile used in Photoshop BUT retains the numbers. The photo takes on a bit more of a cool/blueish cast (as Cyan is about 11% higher than M & Y).
3) When exported as PDFX1a, it will convert everything to destination profile, which is US Web Coated SWOP. But again, it retains the numbers.
When I view the PDF, all the numbers are what I have in Photoshop. But the image on screen definitely has a more blueish cast.
Do your prints come out looking rich but yet still very neutral in overall cast? Or do they get a bit cool?
I’m still waiting to find out if I can contact the printer of this job.
Yes, Kenny, the cyan is definitely higher than magenta and yellow and in the PDFs appear bluish onscreen, but the final printed ad looks neutral (remember, cool black is preferred over warm black in print; large areas of solid black are traditionally backed with 40% cyan only) and much more rich than black alone.
Something else I neglected to mention: digital presses do a much better job of maintaining neutral grays from process colours than analog presses did, so keep this in mind with your workflow. We have one client who uses a printer with older analog presses, and we’ve gone back to supplying black-only images as they could not print 4-colour blacks with consistent results. Yes, they look washed out, but at least they’re not brown or purple.
Kenny,
The Custom CMYK will not be quite the same tone wise or color wise as if you had rebuilt the SWOP profile in ProfileMaker. That might account for your bluishness. The relationship between the channels is what will determine your gray balance, and that is really up to the press you’re on.
Thanks. Good information.
Yeah, I wish we had ProfileMaker, but we do not. The ratio for CMY currently with the custom curve I setup is: M & Y about even, with C about 8-12% higher on average. And the image uses black only up to about 18% or so, then starts introducing CMY in the appropriate ratios.
Peter, would you suggest something different if we weren’t able to determine ahead of time who the printer would be? If we can speak with the printer ahead of time, we’ll of course ask their opinion.
THANKS.
"Custom CMYK" should have been renamed "Obsolete PoorQuality CMYK" a long time ago.
If you don’t know where you’re printing, you can only guess. If all of your images are going to be these rich gray/black images, and you are able to do a press check, you should have no problems.
Chris,
The Custom CMYK should have been updated and overhauled a long time ago so you wouldn’t have to refer to it like that. I’m sure that between you and Thomas, you could come up with a hybrid solution that would keep the people who use it happy. Remember the Imation CFM? There were some interesting features in that.
Kenny,
If you send me an email, I’ll send you a MaxK SWOP profile that you can compare with what you’ve come up with.
"Custom CMYK" should have been renamed "Obsolete PoorQuality CMYK" a long time ago.
Well now, THERE’S the word from the horse’s mouth, eh?
Chris, perhaps we can address this in CS5? There’s no doubt we need to save it in some form. It’s the only easy way to separate with max black for printing screenshots (the only remaining usefulness that I can see.) Not everyone has PM.
But the problems with it are myriad, not the least of which is that the ink definitions are far out of date. You can enter new primary and overprint values that will work pretty well, but what Joe User is ever going to do that? Or even know that he should/could do that?
Seriously, though, there is still an alarmingly high number of printers who spec that files be separated using Custom CMYK. The claim among Custom CMYK fans is that it’s the only way to control GCR. With tighter presses and tighter control (G7), this is becoming less of an issue in general. However, using an ICC workflow, there’s no reason why a "suite" of GRACol and SWOP profiles couldn’t be cooked at three GCR levels from a single set of measurement data (including max black!) and be made available for download from either gracol.org or Adobe. Then, when separating, just pick your GCR level based on image content. That would, in one stroke, remove the argument for clinging to Custom CMYK.
Well, do you need to save the whole concept? A full profile creator tool is, well, a bit beyond Photoshop’s scope.
Or do you mostly need to take existing standard profiles and modify the black generation and total ink limit? And does that have to work for any profile, or just well formed (maybe even Adobe only) profiles?
Chris,
Well, do you need to save the whole concept?
No. That’s my point. If users had access to a simple range of profiles that addressed Kgen and TIL, then the entire Custom thing could probably be tossed.
A full profile creator tool is, well, a bit beyond Photoshop’s scope.
Agreed.
Or do you mostly need to take existing standard profiles and modify the black generation and total ink limit?
Yes, I think that would satisfy the needs of most users. Particularly the ones who are stuck on Custom CMYK.
And does that have to work for any profile, or just well formed (maybe even Adobe only) profiles?
Just the basics to start with. The Adobe defaults (GRACol, SWOP, FOGRA.) A printer who goes to the expense and effort of having his own press profiled could very easily cook a couple more profiles of different GCR levels and offer those to his clients (if he felt it worthwhile.)
Of course, there is debate over the value of fussing over variable GCR in light of tighter press calibration. (I think it’s still of value.) However, whether real or not, there is a perceived need by a good chunk of the market for the ability to manipulate GCR. The ability to choose (as opposed to manipulate) is just as good.
As prepress work gets pushed further upstream, away from the printer and into the design and photography studio, the availability of tools is key to making everyone a little bit happier.
The only thing I see that the old color tables that is of of any use is to perform single color black seps. Now there is device links in CS4 so the color table can go bye bye now, but Rick is correct about having a set of Adobe default d-link profiles.
We also need Device N color fill layers that do not get converted when a color space is performed. A check box would work or a layer style option.
And while you are at it, I need Spot color fill layers that map the layer content to a spot channel. This single feature would blow the doors off CS4 from a marketing standpoint.
well, that and a master RGB working space.
;o)
"Obsolete PoorQuality CMYK" – thats interesting. Apart from Ink definitions why does this method generate "poor quality" separations?
I’ve used it whenever I’ve needed a lighter or heavier black in a separation, and honestly never noticed a problem in QUALITY, maybe thats just me –
Would certainly be useful to have a definable black generation of some sort and the ability to just apply this to different profiles.
What you want is a tweener.
Apart from Ink definitions…
Well, that’s a pretty big thing.
never noticed a problem in QUALITY
Put a Custom CMYK separation and an ICC-based separation next to each other. Look at the saturation in the 3/4 tones and deeper.
Okay, maybe I’m missing something here, but the "Custom CMYK" feature DOES allow you to define your black generation. At the top of the pull-down window is "Custom" and you get a graph to manipulate. Would be nice to also be able to adjust the UCA amount.
A BLODDY TWEENER IS NEEDED!!!!!!!!!!!
Listen to Mike.
(And MO, talk to Chris and send him the spec’s. We’re at the tipping point on this. I think he’s receptive. It would sure save us from having "suites" of profiles. Although that would be better than nothing.)
Rick –
It takes time to explain and time to understand and time to convince and time to implement and time have the time.
One thing at a time.
Prioritize. What’s first?
And what’s most feasible in the real world, i.e., what’s most likely to happen?
It really is time to make a game plan.
Wow. Didn’t intend to disrupt the Adobe inner workings, but maybe it’s a good thing.
I ended up having someone kind enough to spend the time tweeking a generic SWOP profile to produce the results desired and send it over to me (see above). I would not have known the difference at this stage.
When I compared the results from this custom created profile from what I generated from within Photoshop, the INITIAL results looked very similar on screen. The biggest difference was that my profile had no color until about 18% K or so, where as the profile sent to me was a more gradual tapering to the lightest areas. But I had done that to try to avoid potential color shifts in lighter areas. This may not be such a big issue though.
The biggest difference came when I ‘Applied’ the generic SWOP Coated v2 profile to both versions. My version shifted to a more ‘blueish’ cast. The profile sent to me, however, did not change at all. This is probably because it was based on SWOP and modified in a more controlled method.
So for now, unless I can actually find out who will be printing these things, I’ll stick with using the custom profile sent to me, and then applying the SWOPv2 profile. This way all of my images, both full color and b&w, will have the same basic profile applied. But my b&w images have a much better black curve that should produce a rich image with less potential for color shifting.
Thanks to all for the input. I’ll know MUCH more once the job goes to press. But it appears that if Photoshop had some alternate preset profiles (as suggested by Rick & others), I could have gotten here easier (or at least without my fortunate help from someone else).
Prioritize. What’s first?
I think it’s best for me to shut up for once.
;o~
Mike,
He’s converting to the SWOPv2MaxK profile I rebuilt for him. That’s the custom he’s referring to, not the Custom CMYK Setup profile. My thought was that because he’s running both rich grayscale and full color mixed on the same pages, then, without knowing exactly where it’s printing yet, most printers could deal with both types of files that were basically in SWOP v2 color space.
Well, I finally spoke with the printer, and as I had assumed, they don’t have profiles for their press or couldn’t suggest a good workflow for doing this. I have found more printers who don’t understand or implement profiles or color-management than ones who do in my experience. And before you say it, most of the time we don’t get to choose them. So we can’t ‘just go to a better printer’.
So I’m hoping the workflow I’m using now will be the safest, and if there is any color shift on press it can be globally corrected easily enough. We will see.
Thanks again for the help.
Hehehe… the world of "we need it in 4 colour"… but we have no idea of how many targets it will be on and where they will be printed… " but the corp guidelines for the logo are x% cyan, etc…"
Someone told them it was colour management…ooh, that changes the colours, better had turn it off.
But I guess it doesn’t matter, it’s only the 2 of the world’s top 50 brands we’ve done development on in the past year or so…
It’s a mess… it really doesn’t help that the applications default to broken, or that they have idiot mode as the most attractive option.
This is a profile warning that someone has switched on your computer…would you like to ;
A) Panic, and let the app persuade you it’s doing you a favour by doing something behind your back and not telling you what because we don’t think you’ll understand and panic, fearing the colours might go wonky, even though they probably will with this option further down the line…?
B) Do something you don’t understand
C) Do something else you don’t understand
Ok, now, would you like to save the file with something embedded that you don’t understand or like the look of? Hmm…
Don’t get me started on illustrator with embedded artwork going back into PS…
Ozmosis will address a lot of the issues you speak of.
Kenny,
I think you’re on the right track now. Everything is to the same basic separation color standard with a heavy plate for your black and whites. Because there are so many SWOPish files that printers get, most of them can get their rigs pretty close to that. I’d definitely go on press if you can. You can a lot more that just global corrections on press. Have fun. Let us know how it all turns out.
The only time i’ve had ozmosis supply me with enough oxygen was in freefall… as opening your mouth can make your teeth freeze.
The rest of the time it’s just something I watch for on the hull of the boat…
The World is in free fall progress. Just look around you in these forums.
Ozz Fest is coming to California. Not sure if I want to see that mess…
