cmy gradient

[urieilam]

hi again,
question - creating a gradient (indesign cs2), that goes from pure cyan to pure magent to pure yellow. the printing process will be standard 4 color press.

am i going to have problems with this gradient (i'm afraid, for example, of more paper coming through in the in-between zones, making them too light because the colors are pure)?

i've done an iris proof, which should show the colors somewhat accurately, but i'm not sure of how consistent it is with the the screens used in press.

has anyone done something like this or has some ideas about how it'll turn out?

thanks,
uri

["Technical" Terry]

I NEVER use InDesign's gradients. It ALWAYS produces banding in my final negs. I will create my gradients in Photoshop at 600 dpi and then just place them.
P.S. I have noted recently a 1-2% dot gain when using spot colors in Photoshop. (Verified with "separations preview" in InDesign.) Very rarely a problem, but just some info.

[WannaBrie]

I gotta agree with terry here. both indesign and quark produce banding in the gradients. use photoshop.

[Mitch Wood]

And add a little noise, as photoshop will also produce banding.

["Technical" Terry]

At 600dpi I have never had a banding problem. (no noise added) However, maybe by adding noise you could reduce the resolution which would save disk space. With multiple gradients in letter size document you can easily exceed 100MB with 600dpi tif images.

[Mike LC]

adding noise works good in photoshop. However banding also depends on the size of the document; a 50x70cm will have banding sooner then an A4 page.

But to return to your question; i once made a poster which went form 100%M to 100%Y and it looks beautiful (no white/paper shining through). regular cmyk printing on 150lpi.

I made this one in illustrator by the way...
I prefer to use illustrator because of the resolution (export resolution for illustrator is 2400dpi), and filesize is close to nothing.

[jimking]

I've had very few problems with Quark, Indesign or Illustrator's gradients. When you say you are having a banding problem is it from viewing on screen or printing to your desktop printer or the offset printer had problems? As a printer, Photoshop has givin us the worst banding problems and Illustrator the best gradients after ripping the job. The way we've dealt with PS banding is convert to LAB, add noise to B, blur a bit and convert back. Terry you are outputting film? What rip are you using?

["Technical" Terry]

jim,
The shop that I work in does quite a bit of in house printing, however, my job is pre-press for other printing companies (mostly web presses). In house, we go direct to plate, but all of my work goes to film. I havn't had an in house job yet that required great gradients, so I don't how the plate burner rips yet.
My film is set at 1800 dpi @ 133 lpi. It is an ECRM - Harlequin Level 2 Rip.
Any banding that I see is always on the film. On screen and even on the rip when I roam the preview they look perfect. Can never tell till you get the final output. With the PS workflow that I use I never have to worry, all gradients come out great.

[jimking]

Harlequin Level 2 Rip is pretty old. I think version 7 ps level3 is the latest.

["Technical" Terry]

"....if it ain't broke, don't fix it....."

[Mitch Wood]

"....if it ain't broke, don't fix it....."


I NEVER use InDesign's gradients. It ALWAYS produces banding in my final negs. I will create my gradients in Photoshop at 600 dpi and then just place them.


Terry seems like you got some fixing to do fella! ;)