Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Design and Graphics' started by zoran, Mar 24, 2018.
Has anyone ever used a tiff file with layers (like a psd file) on a "to print" layout?
I get actual JPGs sent as "Camera Ready" a lot. I convert to CMYK or Grayscale, place in ID to get the correct ad size and then export a PDF. That PDF gets placed with Editorial on the newspaper page and the whole thing is sent as a PDF to the printer.
It used to be really dicey when we were printing our own paper, but our linescreen improved significantly when we switched to an outside printer.
I don't like it on principle (black type splits across all four plates and the pressmen have to register it) but at 150dpi it works well enough - assuming you were originally sent an image file at high enough resolution.
eyoungren im not certain what you are talking about is relevant to what im asking... is it?
Personally, I error on the side of caution and avoid layers in any image produced for insertion into a page layout or word processing document. I usually have a layered "master" file from which I export a copy that has been flattened. I also don't rely on my page layout program to intelligently scale and resample the image so I always resize to the final reproduction size at an appropriate PPI in Photoshop before saving the flattened copy. Using presized and flattened TIFFs avoids have an excessively large final output file or "collect for output" folder.
Have you actually encountered any issues with unflattened (layered) image files? I personally havent, but i could of been lucky!
Long ago and far away, yes. Since then, I've never risked it. Even if layered files are reliable, they are larger than a flattened file, which adds to the size of the final file, or collection of files, that needs to be sent to the printer.
That is true. Despite what u say about the large file, i must say that a layered tiff is convenient cause one file does it all.
On the other hand, why layered tiff and not psd?
Probably not. I don't think I had had my coffee then and was probably thinking something else.
Sorry. LOL. I saw this and couldn't stop laughing. It's err on the side of caution, not error.
I tend to agree with this approach, as it generally gives peace of mind and a feeling of "trust" for the producer of the artwork, however - if you are providing a final print-ready PDF and the printer is using a reasonably modern RIP, then in theory there shouldn't be an issue. In addition, depending on your settings when making the PDF, it should flatten and resample the layered image to the appropriate resolution.
It's worth experimenting, open up the resulting file in Adobe Acrobat Pro and use the Print tools to preview the separations. Look for artefacts where vectors, images and transparency effects overlap. I would use PSD rather than TIFF though, when using a workflow like this.
Out of interest, what are you composing your artwork in, InDesign, Illustrator or something else?
Quite true, though it is a big IF.
The printer we use for our "coffee table" books wants us to provide the InDesign file along with the collected images and fonts. We use Id's "Collect for output" function to produce the collected files. This requires that I use properly sized, correct color space, and flattened images. Otherwise, I would be sending unnecessarily large image files and would run the risk that their pagination software and RIP handles them improperly.
For simpler projects (rack cards, advertisements, ...) we use printers that prefer print-ready PDFs. For these, it is less of a concern as carefully choosing proper settings in the PDF export ensures that the images are handled appropriately. Even then, I prefer to do any RGB to CMYK conversion in Ps so that I can review the impact of the color space shift. If I'm doing that, I'll flatten the new copy of the image at the same time.
I compose my artwork in Indesign and PDFs are exported using the PDF/X1-a:2001 default setting.