?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Duh - Queue
November 8th, 2005
08:55 am

[Link]

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Duh
Why struggle with making the background transparent when you can just fill in the background with the color it needs to match?

(8 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments
 
[User Picture]
From:jaq
Date:November 8th, 2005 02:09 pm (UTC)
(Link)
That depends.
[User Picture]
From:queue
Date:November 8th, 2005 02:10 pm (UTC)
(Link)
OK, I'll buy that. For my particular needs, however, just changing the color makes a lot more sense.
[User Picture]
From:bubblebabble
Date:November 8th, 2005 02:56 pm (UTC)
(Link)
so that if design constraints, inks, color matching, or other considerations cause the matching color to change slightly (especially by a CYMK-dependent amount that's not perceptible on a RGB monitor), you won't have an oops moment when they don't match any in print.
[User Picture]
From:queue
Date:November 8th, 2005 03:13 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Well, in this case, it's an image I'm placing into the front cover file in PageMaker, and then I'm creating a PDF from that. The background of the cover is 30K (and that's nto going to change, since there's no way we're going to change the look of the journal after 10 years), and that's what I changed the background color to in the image. What's being sent to the printer is a PDF, and this PDF has 30K for both of them, so there couldn't be any issue that pops up, could there?
[User Picture]
From:bubblebabble
Date:November 8th, 2005 03:33 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I wouldn't make promises myself :-), but yeah, it sounds good to me, and more because you're using the same color spaces in each piece of art/background than because you're confident that the colors won't change.

Of course, the hidden benefit of not doing transparent images is that you never have to worry about anti-aliased transparent fuzzies, which can also be hard to catch. :-)

Just zoom in to the edges of the image at 1600% to make doubly sure, is all I'd do.
[User Picture]
From:bubblebabble
Date:November 8th, 2005 03:34 pm (UTC)
(Link)
edges of the image

meaning, the borders of where the image was placed within the PDF. didn't say that, but meant it.
[User Picture]
From:queue
Date:November 8th, 2005 03:40 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Of course, the hidden benefit of not doing transparent images is that you never have to worry about anti-aliased transparent fuzzies, which can also be hard to catch. :-)

Yeah, that was the problem I was running into. The edges of the cow are antialiased, so it was going to look bad regardless of how I made the background transparent (or, at least I couldn't figure out a way to do it).

Just zoom in to the edges of the image at 1600% to make doubly sure, is all I'd do.

Just did that and it looks A-OK.
[User Picture]
From:bubblebabble
Date:November 8th, 2005 04:54 pm (UTC)
(Link)
the other trick is to open (import, really, but through the open command) a the PDF in Photoshop in CMYK mode, then run the eyedropper tool around the areas where you think there might be troublesome transitions (border of image, areas within image, bounding box of image, etc), looking for any unexpected transitions in color values.

That's probably better suited to forensics than routine checking, though.
My Website Powered by LiveJournal.com