“why does this look different than what I’m seeing on my screen”
I’ve gotten this a few times, and each time have explained the differences between a backlit LED screen verses ink on paper.
In my experience I like to use the .psd,
as there have been rare cases where the tif shows up with a black background.
I try not to use .png for printing but if i have to and the client isn’t fussy I could get away with it.
I print what you send me.
.tif, .psd, .eps, .png, I’ll even print that fake halftone bitmap if that’s what you want.
RGB? sure. CMYK, sure.
I draw the line at .psb files though.
And what seems to be forgotten in this entire conversation, though it is implied in several places (and may be in one of the posts I didn’t read,) once you convert an image to CMYK and save it and close it, you may as well not bother converting back to RGB. That color information was lost forever on that closing. Always work on a copy (should go without saying.)
And sRGB is no better than CMYK. A lot of stock companies are supplying images as sRGB, mostly for file size reasons. It certainly isn’t equivalent to full gamut RGB. Most pro photogs save RAW. ProPhoto RGB is the best bet for the most color information for conversion to press profiles but you do risk a severe shift if you don’t know what to expect. As B mentioned, at least having a look at what a proper CMYK profile conversion looks like can stave off the most unexpected results.
And speaking of profiles, in my world, using them is dependent on the machine doing the printing, the inkset in the machine, and the media on which the ink is being jetted (and to some extent the overlamination finishing process.) No where in any of the Adobe softwares are you going to find those profiles. And while some printers may provide Job Options for your PDF output, there is a reason a lot of wide format places want Native files. To apply those highly custom and sometimes proprietary profiles to imagery to get the best possible result. Not that many are left out there. Today’s market seems to be “Done is Good, color be damned.”
I only have a few years left to retirement. I will turn my back on this industry so fast, there will be whirlwinds.
I agree with most here. If it has a transparent background I will use a PSD file.
I’m only in my early 40’s and I’m seriously considering retiring from the industry.
Compressed images like png or jpeg always lose quality.
But the main reason I use psd is that in InDesign I can (des)activitate a layer .
The same thing goes for an ai document
If you’re supplied a JPEG or PNG - and htere are no edits to it - then changing the file format to another for the sake of it - that is opening the image and resaving it to a TIFF or PSD with no edits - you gain absoultely nothing by doing this - except a larger file size.
If you are making edits - then you need to choose the best option for you for the reproduction - whether that is resaving as JPEG or saving as PDF or saving as TIFF or PSD.
You do what the best option is for you.
placed in InDesign
With TIFF and PSD - the vector masks, shapes, and text layers are rasterised to the native file resolution of the TIFF or PSD.
For this reason - if you have vector masks/shapes, text layers in your Photoshop files, then you’re better off saving as a PDF.
And note - any Smart Object or Smart Layer is also rasterised to the native resolution of the Photoshop File.
No, they don’t.
A tiff saved to JPEG with maximum compression - you won’t see any artifacts.
You can test this yourself by taking a Hi Res Tiff - save it as JPEG with maximum compression
Place the JPEG on a layer above in the original image.
Set the JPEG layer to difference - zoom in - any differences will be visible.
Yes, if you save with minimum compression - of course it degrades.
PNG does not have lossy compression. PNG uses LZW compression - which is lossless. Unlike JPG that uses DCT compression.
If you’ve used layers, yes that is handy. If you haven’t - then why bother?
You could do the same with a PDF - TIff - PSD
Or any of the file formats that support layers.
Wait, what?
“Maximum Compression” = minimum quality
“Minimum Compression” = maximum quality.
Did I mix it up?
Should exchange “compression” for quality
Maximum Quality…
Thanks for catching that slip of the pen.
I blame Adobe for naming the compression control “Quality”. It’s a goofy dialog all around that hasn’t changed since Photoshop 4.
Hadn’t really thought about it.
you can convert any file into png fie through internet online sites
