Dov, one clarification/question regarding your advice for screen shots...
In my commercial printing experience, I found TIFF to be a great option for
bitmap files including screen shots. However, I always recommended staying
away from the ZIP compression option. Though a "lossless" format, both
compression and scaling tended to horribly slow down our RIP process.
Though not much of an issue for small files, there also isn't much advantage
to compressing such small files, either.
In my experience with large full-color CMYK images, the ZIP compression
saved roughly 15% of the file size. For that smaller size, the RIP time
would often increase by a factor of 4x or 5x. Scaling the image within the
application (with the exception of InDesign) would also slow the RIP. In
each case, the application passes the processing (decompression, scaling,
and rotating) off to the RIP. If we're all saving to PDF & printing the PDF,
then most RIP's will hardly hiccup, and given the speed of most PDF
generation, it's doubtful you'll be troubled by a (statistically) slower
conversion. Lesson: Convert to PDF with appropriate settings prior to
Back to scren shots: From my point of view, if saving to PDF the compression
is unnecessary, as you can choose to compress in the Distilling process. If
sending for commercial print, then the file savings is likely outweighed by
additional RIP (processing) time.
For screen captures, my clients have the best success simply pasting from
SnagIt, or their application of choice. As the files would almost never be
modified in a bitmap editor, but simply re-captured, the image on disk is a
bit redundant. Anyone care to comment on the pro's and con's of simply
pasting SCREEN CAPTURES only?
GRAFIX Training, Inc.
[mailto:framers-bounces+matt=grafixtraining.com at lists.frameusers.com] On
Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:48 AM
To: Sean; framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: High quality images
I must strongly disagree with ANY advice to resample
screen shots at any stage of the workflow prior to the RIP.
Although this might not be intuitive, upsampling a screen
shot in Photoshop (or name whatever tool you like) prior to
importing or placing into FrameMaker (or name your favorite
layout program) can indeed lead to lossiness. Despite what
many print service providers will tell you, all images
are resampled at the RIP (whether downsampled or upsampled)
to match the combination of the device's actual resolution
and the screening algorithms in use. And such resampling is
typically of quality comparable to the best you can do in
Photoshop. Since resampling is done at the RIP anyway,
doing a "manual" upsampling prior to the RIP process may
cause real content in your image to be lost. For screen shots,
such data lossiness can yield really crufty results. And
such extra resampling prior to the RIP process violates the
"reliable PDF workflow" principles.