I admit, I’m not an experienced pro. Flyers are new to me, I usually just do images. And not really professionally (when friends need favours and don’t want to pay for a truly professional job, is most of my experience - visual art of the non-computer kind is what I’m more comfortable with). What problems would you be watching for, if something came to you as something built in Photoshop?
Okay, thanks. I’ll watch for this.
If you are outputting raster images, it’s a good idea to know the desired output page size, plus the pixels-per-inch of the raster graphics that the print shop can handle, so that you can tailor your images to the output print.
For text and line graphics, this is easiest if you start with vector objects; they will then be rasterized by the print shop at (ideally) optimal resolution. For raster images like photographs, you need to know at least two of: [ul][li]the printer’s desired pixels-per-inch (or centimetre) value,[]the output dimensions of the images on the printed page,[]the pixel dimensions of the the images.[/ul] You can then size your images and composition to suit the printed output, and then provide a TIFF or another flat image file to the printer. [/li]
The printer does not need to use a Photoshop file. But if you provide a final image with text rasterized as part of it, you need to be damn sure that you get a proof so that you can check that all your text is readable.
Part of the reason that vector drawing files are preferred for the letterforms in text, as well as for technical illustrations, is that they are ‘resolution-independent’. They can be resized all over the place during the production process, and not lose any sharpness, because the final rasterization is done just before the file is printed.
PDFs, by the way, can contain both raster and vector data. Sharp text can surround blurry raster images, especially is the PDF as been ‘optimized for download’. This compresses all the raster images contained in the PDF, and reduces their size, at the cost of sharpness. You do NOT want to print from such a PDF. PDFs for print need large, sharp images.
The original purpose of PDFs–PDF stands for “Portable Document Format”-- was to lock in things like page size, font, layout, and format, so that they could be sent from client to printer without suffering change. In this, they are kind of the opposite of web pages, which are designed to reflow and adapt to the particular browser and environment in which they are viewed. In my old job, we sent PDFs to the printer.
And a tablet is just an interface for operating the computer, as are mouses, joysticks, keyboards, etc. You can make both vector and raster images with a tablet; it all depends on what program you are using.
I’m not certain what the current images in the document are - raster or vector…is there any way I can check? The ones I need to add - well, I’ll try to make them vector, I guess, by having a look at the software I’m using with the tablet. And failing that, I’ll contact the printer and find - let me see -
(Thank you Sunspace).
I think the end result will be that there are some raster images I won’t be able to avoid (logo, for example, which I didn’t design - I don’t know what it is currently, but I suspect raster). This means I’ll need to check exactly what they’re doing at the printer’s, and thank you again Sunspace for letting me know what questions to ask.
I don’t know how tablets work, but I suspect it is bitmap-based. What kind of file is the output? TIF, GIF, JPG, PSD, BMP, PCX – all are bitmaps. EPS, CDR, AI, PS are vector (although EPS and PS can store bitmaps internally, too).
Photoshop is bitmap based. Adobe Illustrator is vector. Corel PhotoPaint is bitmap, Corel Draw is vector. MS Paint is bitmap.
Note that there is some convergence in this field, and some programs can convert from one to the other. Try to avoid conversions – there is almost always some compromise.
As a matter of mostly historical interest, an oscilloscope is a vector drawing device (the electron beam is told to move from point A to point B to draw a line or curve, which is always smooth) while a standard TV is raster (any diagonal line or curve is created by fractional parts of horizontal scan lines) and the line is jagged. If you think of the difference between these displays, it might help visualize the problem.
ETA: I thought your “tablet” was a separate computer, not just an input device. What others said probably applies; it’s just a variation on a mouse.
Let’s see…
First thing I’d do is open the Photoshop file and look at the layers.
Are the different graphic elements on separate layers, or are they merged together? If they are merged, the file will take longer to rebuild if changes are needed.
Are the images heavily compressed? Different image formats work best for different kinds of image. For example, the compression in a JPEG is designed for photographs, where colours change slowly across the image. If you use JPEG compression on an image with sharp linework, like a scanned ink drawing, you’ll get “artifacts”–inaccurate colour rendering–at the edges.
Are the images and text all RGB or all CMYK? This is not so much a problem with an individual Photoshop file, but if you’re dealing with things like InDesign files, they can be built of of many elements that can be either CMYK or RGB. So can PDFs.
In my old job, part of what I did was to make sure that no RGB or CMYK elements got into the output where they aren’t wanted. There are “preflight” checks you can run in Adobe Acrobat to analyze a newly-created PDF and check for these kinds of errors. For something going to a quick-print shop, it might not be that important, but if you’re setting up for an offset run of 5000 items, you need to be right. Errors cost.
Then I’d look for the text. Is the text on its own layer and editable, or is it already rasterized? (Early versions of Photoshop rasterized the text as soon as it was inserted; only in version 5 did text remain editable.) If it’s already rasterized, there may be problems if the rasterization settings of the text don’t play well with the print output settings. This can be a problem with images as well, but it’s a lot more noticeable with text because the elements of the text are smaller.
Yep. A bitmap is a raster, and as pulykamell notes “rasterize” is the standard verb for describing a conversion from vector to bitmap. You can’t very well say “bitmapize”, can you?
(bolding mine)
Trouble alert! If your logo is a raster file, it will need to be large and high-resolution. Logos work best as vector files; they can then be resized to fit without losing sharpness.
And ask the people you’re getting the files from, exactly what you’re getting. Try to get raster files as large and high-quality as possible. You can always reduce them later, but you can’t replace sharpness and detail that has been compressed out of existence.
Place I know, the print shop had to practically pull teeth to get the town to provide its logo in vector format. All they had was a raster copy that was too small. And they were putting it on a large poster, so when scaled up it looked all jaggy and nasty. Not the way you want to advertise your organization!
No prob!
5000 is, in all likelihood, exactly the run we’re expecting.
I’m not certain that the logo is rasterised: I’ll check. Is it something I have to ask, or is there any way to run this sort of check on my own? (I’m not certain the guy who sent it to me will know the answer to this one). I do have access to the images.
Oh, god, a raster image that’s too small! I’ve had that exact situation with the last company I worked with (who, after realising I was quite handy with graphics / artwork, tried using me as their free graphic designer). They didn’t seem to understand the problem, either, no matter how many times I explained it to them (Surely you have a high-resolution copy of your corporate logo?!). Mind you, this is a place that asked me to replace an arrow with something “clearer” for non-native speakers. Is there something clearer than an arrow? This was to point to the door they had to walk through.
Anyway.
What sort of a difference does CMYK (which, to be honest, I never use) and RGB (which I use all the time) make in printing a document? Is it better for every layer to be the same? From your post I gather it’s better to keep layers separate, rather than merging (which makes sense, though without being told I’d probably have merged them “for simplicity’s sake”).
If you have the original images, the type of image should tell you a lot about it. Vector images include Adobe Illustrator. Raster images include JPEG and PNG. Some files such as PDF and InDesign can contain both raster and vector content.
Gaaah! twitch
CMYK is much closer to the way offset presses actually operate. CMYK files specify colours in as amounts of Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, and blacK, corresponding to the inks used in four-colour printing. RGB is similar to the way monitors operate.
Extremely important question: are you doing this in colour or black-and-white? If in colour, you’ll need to pay attention to colour calibration, so that the colour that rolls off the press is the same as the one you were expecting.
I believe home printers accept RGB input and convert it themselves to their palettes of ink, perhaps because home users are used to RGB.
Printers will accept RGB files as well, and do their best to convert them to the inks used on the presses. If they are doing a quick-print job on a printer similar to a home printer, and the customer is happy with the non-precise output, no problem. But if they are doing a job for high-volume offset printing, and making separate plates for each colour of ink, there needs to be greater presicion.
Professional users often set their files up to use CMYK, so that there is less chance of change when the file is accepted at the printer. When you send an RGB file to an offset printer who uses CMYK, it will be converted to the closest CMYK values. But there are different ways to do the conversion and you need to know what the printer is doing.
If you are doing your work in CMYK, the printer can simply take it and run with it. But on your computer, there will be an internal conversion so that your display can show the file. This is because your display is RGB.
At this point, colour calibration of your scanner and monitor becomes important. You need to ensure that the colour that rolls off the press is the same as the one you were expecting.
It’s best to keep everything as apart as possible, in different layers. This gives you the greatest flexibility to change one part without affecting the others. You can also use things like adjustment layers to make reversible changes. You only make things simple at the end, in the copy of the file that you give to your customer or printer.
Long-time prepress guy here. The majority of photoshop files I get are not print-ready. Most common problems: No bleed, wrong colorspace, resolution too low. And, if flattened, not really editable. Type, if rasterized, is usually bitmapped. If it is still in layers, I may not have the actual (exact) font to replace it. Honestly, most of the photoshop layouts I get are amateur. And some of the worst are from web designers.
I was trying not to mention colour spaces. 
We’ve got to treat these people as grownups.
I’m a graphic designer that used to work in the print world. The main reason I’d not like an actual PSD file when dealing with clients is you’re likely to get a layered file with live text and no fonts to go with it.
Also, generally only amateur designers use Photoshop to typeset documents. This means that you might have to worry about colorspace, bleed, DPI, fonts, total ink and live effects. I can see denying PSD files because you just don’t want to deal with the level of client that would bring one in.
That said, I’ve designed things in Photoshop before, but I would never turn in anything but a PDF nowadays.
Edit: I just read seal_cleaner’s post. Yeah, what he said. 
Oh, we don’t refuse photoshop files. We take them, and publisher files, and word, and excel, and powerpoint, and coreldraw, and pagemaker…
I haven’t thought about Publisher in years. Jesus-merciful-fuck that’s a shitty program.
My condolences. 
Huh??? I design a product which is 24"x36". When I wanted a professional printer to print 8000 copies, he wanted it in PDF format.
I like getting well-prepared PDF’s (We actually have a PDF workflow) But they are difficult to edit. And about 85% of all files we get need fixing.
This is why the customer needs to talk to the printer and find out what the printer can do, and then prepare the files accordingly. A little more work before means fewer problems later. (Been there, done that, don’t want the T-shirt…)
Edit: what kinds of problems? I went around and around during the initial setup with a CMYK PDF using two spot colours, but by the time we went to press, that thing was solid. No problems whatsoever. Fun thing with spot colours: you can preflight to check for extraneous CMYK objects in the PDF, then you have to go back and track them down and change them to spot; otherwise you’ll get extraneous CMYK plates appearing beside your desired spot-colour plates. But on screen they look the same (black, say). So yes, I had a problem due to something being the wrong shade of black.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMac]
Oh, god, a raster image that’s too small! I’ve had that exact situation with the last company I worked with (who, after realising I was quite handy with graphics / artwork, tried using me as their free graphic designer). They didn’t seem to understand the problem, either, no matter how many times I explained it to them (Surely you have a high-resolution copy of your corporate logo?!)…
[/QUOTE]
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to take a ratty copy of someone’s logo off their website or worse, off a business card, and trace it with a vector drawing app. More often than not, any text is hopeless and best erased for the purposes of tracing the logo’s shapes, then re-set in whatever that’s a decent match. If it’s a smallish local outfit, the owner’s kid probably did it with some flavor of Times or Arial, but all bets are off with national companies, and invariably, there’s much gnashing of teeth and futzing around with kerning and tracking to make it fit.
And then, they have the gall to ask afterward if I can make an embroidery pattern out of it. Well, Daddy-O, digitizing or “punching” embroidery patterns is an entirely different artform that I don’t do, and why did I go through the trouble to make a nice scalable rendition of your logo if you’re only going to have it “printed” in thread at the rough equivalent of 35 dpi?
Bleah!