Colour shift!

[annc]

Got a full page advertisement from a local design house (PC-based, bloke uses CorelDRAW, although I haven't contacted him about this, so it's just vaguely possible he used something else) as a CMYK JPEG. I've had his ads before and they're a breeze to deal with. Also got a logo for a local shop from him, and it's perfectly behaved.

There was no printout accompanying the ad, which looked a little dark when I placed it in InDesign (Mac). Because it was already CMYK (one of the few I get) I didn't open it in Photoshop. I just resized it to fit the page, and went on to the next page, although I can remember thinking it was a bit dark.

Anyway, I sent off the colour proofs to the client, and got a frantic phone call today, saying that there was something badly wrong with my colour proofing system, and that the problem was with this ad.

Deciding to go to the original file, I double-clicked the file on the floppy. Quicktime decided it owned the file, and showed what you see in Attachment 1.

I then looked at the page in InDesign, which showed what you see in Attachment 2. Huge colour difference.

So I opened the file in Photoshop, which can be seen in Attachment 3. It turns out that this was what I should have been seeing all along.

When I saved the file out of Photoshop as a Photoshop file and placed that in InDesign, I got what I saw in Photoshop.

None of my equipment is calibrated, but I doubt if this is the problem. I haven't changed any of my colour settings in InDesign or Photoshop, and the other files I've had from this studio have no colour problems whatever.

Anybody got any idea what's causing this?

[Franca]

Good lord, that's awful! Looks like something very odd happened when he saved it as JPEG out of whatever app he was using. The fact that QuickTime seized the file is disturbing; I suspect an incorrect JPEG option on saving. ??

Since you know it's supposed to look the same as the Photoshop file I would just resave it out of Pshop for now. But then I would ask exactly what he did - what app it was created in and how it was saved as JPEG - so that, with luck, this doesn't happen again. Bummer. Until you identify the problem you should probably check all JPEG files in Photoshop before placing them. Unless, of course, someone else here knows exactly what's occurred. :-)

In fact my curiosity is piqued; you can e-mail me the file if you like. I'd like to see what it does here!

[annc]

Good lord, that's awful! Looks like something very odd happened when he saved it as JPEG out of whatever app he was using. The fact that QuickTime seized the file is disturbing; I suspect an incorrect JPEG option on saving. ??

Since you know it's supposed to look the same as the Photoshop file I would just resave it out of Pshop for now. But then I would ask exactly what he did - what app it was created in and how it was saved as JPEG - so that, with luck, this doesn't happen again. Bummer. Until you identify the problem you should probably check all JPEG files in Photoshop before placing them. Unless, of course, someone else here knows exactly what's occurred. :-)

In fact my curiosity is piqued; you can e-mail me the file if you like. I'd like to see what it does here!This man tried to pick a fight with me when i went to ask him for a copy of the logo. I just happened to mention in passing that I worked on a Mac, and received a verbal tongue-lashing. In fact, he got so hot and angry that I was considerably surprised when it turned up in my e-mail. And my client says that when he told him the bad printout had come out of InDesign and a Mac, he blamed both of them, and me, for the problem. No way I'll go near him again. He's got a real problem. He does great stuff, though, so it's a pity. I'll just remind my client that all ads are required to have a printout accompanying them. And I'll certainly open any JPEGs from him in Photoshop before placing them

What surprised me was that simply saving it as a Photoshop file and then placing it fixed the problem.

It's just possible that I don't have Photoshop as the preferred application for JPEGs set on the PC. I can easily do that, and will as soon as I've finished here.

It's a horror, isn't it? I'm glad other people think so.

As you've offered, I'll certainly send you a copy. It would be interesting to see what Ventura does with the JPEG.

[Franca]

Oh my - definitely stay away from that guy. Good thing he's not the client!

[annc]

Oh my - definitely stay away from that guy. Good thing he's not the client!Too true. The client's a sweetie. Oh, and the file is on its way.

[michelen]

Just curious about why you are placing jpegs?
In my workflow, any jpegs are opened in Photoshop and re-saved either as .eps or .tif. We check resolution and color mode, and resize if necessary. I have a phobia about placed images that are reduced more than 50% or enlarged more than 110% in InDesign. (I have an ongoing war with one of my designers about this, but that's another story).

What are your color management settings in Photoshop? Is it possible that the original image was saved with some odd profile, and that you "fixed" it when you opened it in Photoshop? Was it really CMYK? Was it really a jpeg?

As for the Mac/PC thing, grr. I am PC at home and Mac at work. IDCS and PSCS at work, IDCS and PS7 at home. Color management settings the same on both platforms. No problems.

And, yes, you should definitely insist on a printout to accompany all ads. Although I have to be honest, it hasn't done us much good. We routinely get printouts from our advertising clients that don't match the file. We produce an in-house proof and compare it to the client-supplied proof, and at least half the time, they don't match up at all. Different size, different content, different everything. And we're dealing with some "reputable" ad agencies.

We get a majority of our ads in PDF X/1-a format, but that doesn't stop them wanting a "make good" when their ad doesn't print as they expect. Oh, don't get me started.

Best,
Michele

[annc]

Just curious about why you are placing jpegs?Apart from the occasional JPEG from someone who really doesn't have a clue, they usually work well. I've learnt my lesson now, and will always open in Photoshop and save as .psd.

In my workflow, any jpegs are opened in Photoshop and re-saved either as .eps or .tif. We check resolution and color mode, and resize if necessary. I have a phobia about placed images that are reduced more than 50% or enlarged more than 110% in InDesign.I was taught by a very clever photographer to limit any resizing to 30% in either direction. I generally resize in Photoshop to final size before placing in InDesign.

What are your color management settings in Photoshop? Is it possible that the original image was saved with some odd profile, and that you "fixed" it when you opened it in Photoshop? Was it really CMYK? Was it really a jpeg?.My settings are the default. I've received CMYK JPEGs from this source before, and they've been rock solid on screen, in proofs, and in final output.

As for the Mac/PC thing, grr. I am PC at home and Mac at work. IDCS and PSCS at work, IDCS and PS7 at home. Color management settings the same on both platforms. No problems.I started my computing career on mainframes, worked for years with both mainframe and mini operating systems, and these days work happily on both Mac and PC. My personal preference is for the Mac interface, but am comfortable with both, and let people know this. I've survived the platform wars in this forum, too!

And, yes, you should definitely insist on a printout to accompany all ads. Although I have to be honest, it hasn't done us much good. We routinely get printouts from our advertising clients that don't match the file. We produce an in-house proof and compare it to the client-supplied proof, and at least half the time, they don't match up at all. Different size, different content, different everything. And we're dealing with some "reputable" ad agencies.Yes, but having a printout provided by the advertiser gives you something to wave in their face when they blame you. I think I've convinced my client that it's worth their while to demand it.

We get a majority of our ads in PDF X/1-a format, but that doesn't stop them wanting a "make good" when their ad doesn't print as they expect. Oh, don't get me started.I'd love to be able to enforce any standard for ad submission. But this publication is a very local one, and I'm grateful to get even Word files from these people. They are all local small business people accustomed to dealing with the free weekly newspapers in black and white for their advertising.

[donmcc]

The problem is not one of calibration, but of CMYK jpg. At one time a CMYK jpg created in PS would not even appear in IE, and in Netscape came in with color shifts similar to what you saw (and worse ... there were vertical scan lines through it all).

It doesn't surprise me that PS treated the thing correctly, but many other apps will not. I suspect that the colors on at least one of the bad ones above are very much like inverted colors ... the app just rendered C as R, Y as G and M as B. The other one must have tried to be more creative with the colors, but failed.

Lesson: Don't ever use CMYK jpgs (at least not in apps that don't understand them).

Don McCahill

[annc]

Lesson: Don't ever use CMYK jpgs (at least not in apps that don't understand them).I suppose that in my naïvete, I expected InDesign to know what to do with a CMYK JPEG.

I'll know better next time.

[terrie]

How odd...I didn't even know you could save a CMYK jpg...if you want, send it to me (74727.3164@compuserve.com) and I'll place it in ID and see what happens...

Terrie

[annc]

How odd...I didn't even know you could save a CMYK jpg...if you want, send it to me (74727.3164@compuserve.com) and I'll place it in ID and see what happens...

TerrieThanks. I was hoping someone with ID in Windows would offer. It'll be in your inbox soon (a 1 MB file)

[terrie]

>>annc: It'll be in your inbox soon (a 1 MB file)

Cool...I let you know what happens...hmmm...let me go see if it's there yet...

Yep...it's green...just like your 2nd attachment...and opening it in PS7, it's just like your 3rd attachment...

So at least things are consistent cross-platform...

Terrie

[annc]

>>annc: It'll be in your inbox soon (a 1 MB file)

Cool...I let you know what happens...hmmm...let me go see if it's there yet...

Yep...it's green...just like your 2nd attachment...and opening it in PS7, it's just like your 3rd attachment...

So at least things are consistent cross-platform...Thanks for performing that experiment, Terrie.

I'll go back over this entire job now and make sure all the placed photos (30 or so) are all Photoshop documents.

Thanks.

[terrie]

>>annc: Thanks for performing that experiment, Terrie.

You're welcome...anytime...I just remembered that there was a post on the Photoshop Users list a couple of days ago about this very thing so it appears to be a common problem with cmyk jpg's...


>>I'll go back over this entire job now and make sure all the placed photos (30 or so) are all Photoshop documents.

Probably a good idea...'-}}

Terrie

[Franca]

The problem is not one of calibration, but of CMYK jpg

Aha. Good to have confirmation that what I suspected is a 'known issue'!

[marlene]

Thanks. I was hoping someone with ID in Windows would offer. It'll be in your inbox soon (a 1 MB file)

I know it's moot now, but I'm insanely curious -- please send me the file. I've got ID, and will see what happens.

mxh

[marlene]

FWIW, I never, ever place a JPEG in Quark, ID, or anything else. I always open it in Photoshop (partly so I can scrutinize it carefully for artifacts, so I'll have something to complain about) and resave as an uncompressed TIFF.

I don't think anyone ever recommended doing that, but I am always leery of JPEGs.

mxh

[annc]

FWIW, I never, ever place a JPEG in Quark, ID, or anything else. I always open it in Photoshop (partly so I can scrutinize it carefully for artifacts, so I'll have something to complain about) and resave as an uncompressed TIFF.

I don't think anyone ever recommended doing that, but I am always leery of JPEGs.So am I now. I'd already started saving everything as Photoshop native files, because InDesign likes them, but changed the few remaining JPEGs this morning before sending the job off to the printer. Now I've got my fingers crossed that everything is right. This is the largest full colour job I've ever done – 24 A4 pages each with a background tint, text and up to four small ads, or all photos. I had to delve into my old Click Art clip art CDs for some of the graphics, and ended up with about a thousand colours. One of the Click Art b&w EPSes was RGB. Did you ever find that with that set? Took me ages to find it, because ID just told me the page it was on.

And all the clip art colours were Spot CMYK, so I had to go in and change them all to Process.

ID didn't complain about anything when I packaged it up, so I'm hoping it will all print without any problems. At least the printer will handle native ID files, so that's a relief. I rang another printer this afternoon for another full colour job (for the same client). The printer was supposed to handle Mac files, according to his web site, but when I spoke to him, he said he was PC only, and wanted either CorelDRAW or Illustrator files. We eventually compromised on PDF. <g>

[annc]

I know it's moot now, but I'm insanely curious -- please send me the file. I've got ID, and will see what happens.It's on its way right now.

Do let me know what happens at your end.

[marlene]

When I placed the JPG in InDesign, it was the dark green-and-magenta version. (Same when I distlled the ID page to a PDF.) But when I placed it in Quark, it looked perfect -- same as when I opened it in Photoshop.

I tried to open the file with a text editor -- before it froze up, I saw a reference to U-Lead on the top line. Maybe the guy used U-Lead's photo editing software to create the JPEG?

I'm boggled as to why Quark could handle the JPEG properly and ID couldn't.

I haven't used any Click Art images in so long, I can't remember if any of them were RGB.

And all the clip art colours were Spot CMYK, so I had to go in and change them all to Process.

You mean you changed the colors in ID, or went into each clip art file and changed the colors?

In Quark, I'm never quite sure if I need to convert all colors, since there's a setting to output everything as process color (and if I click that setting and do a test run by printing separations to Distiller, I only get CMYK seps).

But I do convert the colors anyway, just so nothing goes wrong at the printer's.

mxh

[annc]

I tried to open the file with a text editor -- before it froze up, I saw a reference to U-Lead on the top line. Maybe the guy used U-Lead's photo editing software to create the JPEG?Thanks for doing that. It crossed my mind to try it, but in the flurry of getting the job out to the printer yesterday the thought passed right through. I wish this bloke was more rational; it would be good to be able to have a chat to him about processes. I'm going to be getting his files six times a year, so have to have a method of dealing with them.

I'm boggled as to why Quark could handle the JPEG properly and ID couldn't.Me too. Especially as ID is behaving identically on both platforms. Oh, well, next issue I'll just open this designer's file in Photoshop and convert it. Then if I have time, I might place it directly into an ID file, just to see if there's a similar problem. My client is going to insist on paper copies from everyone in the future. We had a problem with a second ad caused by lack of one. The second one was a misunderstanding. I got a .doc file on a CD with no explanation and just converted it to PDF and placed it. Turns out the advertiser expected me to typeset it.

I haven't used any Click Art images in so long, I can't remember if any of them were RGB.I hadn't used any of these for years before this job. But it's for a local radio station, and I'm expected to come up with seasonal images (Easter bunny for this one) and things like fridges and washing machines and bike riders. All for a very basic price.

You mean you changed the colors in ID, or went into each clip art file and changed the colors?

In Quark, I'm never quite sure if I need to convert all colors, since there's a setting to output everything as process color (and if I click that setting and do a test run by printing separations to Distiller, I only get CMYK seps).

But I do convert the colors anyway, just so nothing goes wrong at the printer's.I'm sure there's such a setting in ID as well, but like you, I'm keen to be sure in my own mind that only four plates will get spat out at the other end. The preflight utility in ID gives me some decent feedback on this, and none of the printers I've sent files to has ever complained.

[groucho]

Ann, I would suggest that the root of the problem is not PC-vs-Mac or InDesign. Certainly every app and platform has had its bugs but the import/export filter problems in Corel are why I began calling it CruelFlaw many years ago.

The root problem is probably that the PC guy is using JPEG for a *print* job. JPEG is not designed for printed images, it is designed (and mainly used) for RGB monitor/camera images and IMNSHO it has no business being used for print images.

He's opening a can of worms with CMYK-RGB dual conversion problems, since "normal" JPEG images will be presumed to be RGB. It shouldn't be a problem but "shouldn't" is one of those things a professional tries to ensure CAN'T and WON'T be an issue. JPEG excels at shrinking file size by making a blurry image for a blurry monitor. TIF files can set size/resolution to ensure maximum sharpness for a printed page--without guessing how much blur is acceptable. There's no reason for JPEG on press!

I've yet to hear a good reason (not just an excuse) for someone not using a standard CMYK TIF file for print production. Or at least, submitting a PDF file as a "soft proof" whenever there's a possibility of problems--even for a simple (ha) ad file.

Perhaps after several days of calming time, you can call him up and explain the realities of the print process, and convince him that crises *are* avoidable.

[annc]

Perhaps after several days of calming time, you can call him up and explain the realities of the print process, and convince him that crises *are* avoidable.Not this bloke. He goes postal at the mere mention of Macintosh. I discovered that the day I wandered innocently into his studio to ask for a copy of a logo he'd designed.

He goes postal at the mere mention of InDesign. My client discovered that the day he went into his studio to get him to look at the proof. He'd already been asked to provide a PDF, but sent a JPEG on two occasions. No print accompanied the JPEG on either occasion. He is not amenable to any sort of discussion.

[terrie]

>>annc: I wish this bloke was more rational; it would be good to be able to have a chat to him about processes. I'm going to be getting his files six times a year, so have to have a method of dealing with them.

Maybe if you wrote him a note telling him that you've always found his files to be good which was why this particular instance was so surprising and adding a bit about having had the file checked in ID/win and that you would be interested in discussing it with him?

As he's so defensive, perhaps a letter would allow him to deal with this in a more rational way???

Terrie

[marlene]

My client also requires paper proofs for ads, but we often don't get them. I just tell the client I will not take responsibility for anything printing properly if I don't have a paper proof.

A lot of the ads we get have various problems -- some technical (wrong size, no bleed, elements to close to the edge, tiny white type knocked out of a process build background), as well as typos and thinkos (an ad for an event that will have already occurred before the ad runs). But I think the worst problem is the low-quality JPEGs. We've got a full-page, process-color ad that runs every month, and the quality is terrible. It's really low resolution (under 150 dpi, IIRC), and full of JPEG artifacts.

When I talked to the designer, he said the ad had run in another publication and looked fine. So I gave up, but warned my client that it would look awful. And it does. That's the ad with the tiny white text knocked out of the process background. <sigh>

Do you have any clip art libraries besides the Click Art? I find Click Art's quality variable (some images are really good, some are not). CorelDraw clip art usually pretty good (as far as the actual image quality goes), if you can find the image you need. If you don't have CorelDraw, you can usually find the older versions cheap. I bought mine (full retail version of CorelDraw 9, still shrink-wrapped, and legit -- I was able to register it) on eBay for less than $60, and that was a couple years ago. I bought it mainly to get a newer version of FontNavigator, but of course it also includes the clip art, zillions of fonts (mostly Bitstream) and the software. But you probably already know all this. <g>

mxh

[annc]

My client also requires paper proofs for ads, but we often don't get them. I just tell the client I will not take responsibility for anything printing properly if I don't have a paper proof.

A lot of the ads we get have various problems -- some technical (wrong size, no bleed, elements to close to the edge, tiny white type knocked out of a process build background), as well as typos and thinkos (an ad for an event that will have already occurred before the ad runs). But I think the worst problem is the low-quality JPEGs. We've got a full-page, process-color ad that runs every month, and the quality is terrible. It's really low resolution (under 150 dpi, IIRC), and full of JPEG artifacts.

When I talked to the designer, he said the ad had run in another publication and looked fine. So I gave up, but warned my client that it would look awful. And it does. That's the ad with the tiny white text knocked out of the process background. <sigh>I'm amazed at what comes out of some so-called designers' computers. The last issue of this newsletter had a full colour ad for the back page with a photo that had been squashed horizontally. It had a group of five people in it, and they looked dreadful. I suggested to the client that he should ask the advertiser if they intended it to look like that, but he just smiled and shrugged.

And then there's the text with straight quotes and apostrophes, typos, not to mention ads offering special deals but no contact details, ads for events with no dates at all on them...

Yesterday I picked up on an ad that had been approved for this issue with a couple of changes. As I looked at the screen while the colour proof was being reprinted for the ad immediately above this one, I noticed that it was still offering Christmas specials. <g>

Do you have any clip art libraries besides the Click Art? I find Click Art's quality variable (some images are really good, some are not). CorelDraw clip art usually pretty good (as far as the actual image quality goes), if you can find the image you need. If you don't have CorelDraw, you can usually find the older versions cheap. I bought mine (full retail version of CorelDraw 9, still shrink-wrapped, and legit -- I was able to register it) on eBay for less than $60, and that was a couple years ago. I bought it mainly to get a newer version of FontNavigator, but of course it also includes the clip art, zillions of fonts (mostly Bitstream) and the software. But you probably already know all this. <g>Ooh, I have a copy of CorelDRAW 7, and never even think to look there for clip art. I agree that the Click Art stuff is variable. It was difficult to find a decent Santa for the first issue, but I found a reasonable Easter Bunny for this one. So many of the images have lurid colours; the other day I was iChatting with KT while placing a magenta fridge in an ad. <g> But there are some gems. A delightful collection of Christmas elves in B&W, for example, that I've used more than once.

In an ideal world, I'd never need to use clip art at all, of course.

[annc]

>>annc: I wish this bloke was more rational; it would be good to be able to have a chat to him about processes. I'm going to be getting his files six times a year, so have to have a method of dealing with them.

Maybe if you wrote him a note telling him that you've always found his files to be good which was why this particular instance was so surprising and adding a bit about having had the file checked in ID/win and that you would be interested in discussing it with him?

As he's so defensive, perhaps a letter would allow him to deal with this in a more rational way???Hmm, he'd probably consider that condescending. He doesn't admit to any fault at all in this instance. It's all at my end.

[terrie]

>>annc: Hmm, he'd probably consider that condescending. He doesn't admit to any fault at all in this instance. It's all at my end.

Ah well...never mind...he sounds like an all around idiot...his loss...

Terrie