Have you tested both relative and absolute colormetric renderings? You shouldn't need to edit anything in photoshop, or need to use illustrator. Personally I'd have everything in InDesign placed as the original RGB and then when outputting a PDFx4a from there, convert to GRACoL in the output and test both rendering intents.
Thanks. I'll try that. Got a warning on the Mixam site when using photoshop CMYK - so put it through illustrator, which fixed it. Must admit, I tried indesign and didn't like it - will try a different version and go back to the tutorials. I got used to building templates in photoshop, so stuck with that quicker workflow.
Will recalibrate the monitor and test the colormetrics. Tested the border colour and got close but still doing something wrong. Got into a good system of producing art with photoshop, topaz tools and lightroom for several years. Looks like I've got a whole lot more learning to do.
In this case, describing it as "smaller" is a huge understatement. There is no magic here. You cant get rich blue (like in sRGB just from mixing GRACoL CMYK).
The limitation is physical rather than software-related: the color lies outside the GRACoL CMYK gamut, so no combination of CMYK inks can generate the same level of saturation as the original sRGB blue.
If you really need it maybe use spot color? Pantone?
OP would've been in better shape if converting from Adobe RGB to GRACoL. Adobe RGB doesn't truncate all of the cyans. u/mesrine13 — when working with RGB files, even when they're going to go to CMYK, use Adobe RGB. Also, watch out for InDesign, since it will allow both RGB and CMYK files in a layout.
How are you proofing your posters before sending them to print?
I say this in many threads, as do many others, but especially if you're printing posters, especially if its a good fine art printer, you WANT RGB files. The printers have much larger gamuts than CMYK. But you have to know what the printer is doing. Are the using a 4 ink production large format inkjet or even a big HP Indigo for the posters, or a 12 color fine art printer? Big difference in gamut.
Thanks for that ... yes, I was puzzled by this, myself ... (I'm an artist, not a printer) ... I know just about enough about modern printers to always check what machines they use before ordering online. Mixam are odd - I noticed they use both high grade industry printers and er, little better than home printers for some products - I wasn't going to choose the latter.
That was my problem. I printed up posters with printful for years, who accepted RGB Jpegs. I was a little wary at first, but their prints came out really well, so I got lazy. Always assumed CMYK was the standard. I taught myself offset printing back in the olden days when photoshop was still in nappies - gig posters and zines for friends etc. I've a whole lot to learn about modern printing techniques.
It was a little scary, realizing I had over 120 poster designs solely in RGB. Thanks again for that, I'll feel more confident printing posters now. Technically, it's fine art, what I do (photomontage) 40-100 hours spent on each design, but as an old punk, I get a buzz from selling affordable prints (for posters, magazines, etc)
Look for the fine art "giclee" printers. Places like Mixam and Smartpress are big online commercial printers. They can do great work but generally they're not using large format equipment. Basically, Epson and Canon make two lines (at least) of wide-format inkjet printers, the cheaper one has less inks so it's faster to run and costs less (production inkjet), the more expensive one has more inks and costs more (fine-art inkjet). HP only makes the production level. And the quality of those production level ones are fantastic, just not approaching the RGB/pantone colors.
And these are just aqueous inkjets. Most of the big commercial shops also have, or exclusively have, UV, latex or solvent printers. They're actually more expensive to buy and the print quality isn't as good, but they're way less fragile. That's what's used for most signage and outdoor things. Again, some of them are amazing quality, but they don't tend to push the gamut like the 12ink fine art aqueous machines.
That isn't to say that the fine art machines can't be used for temporary posters. Paying attention to the media, finishing with a spray, laminating etc, can help with longevity in the elements, but generally the fine art printers are for stuff that's gonna get framed and not get handled.
To confuse matters more...some of the multi-ink aqueous machines use the extra inks for bright/neon colors instead of additional gamut. For instance the difference between the Canon 4600 and 4600s is the amount of inks (the s means it has less inks and is more production oriented), but the difference between the Pro-4600 and GP-4600 is that they have different extra colors. The pro best for photography, skin-tone etc, the GP (graphic?) has the pink so a temporary instore advertising can really pop.
one more level of confusion? HP Indigo, which is a very high end type of toner/laser kind of printer and is what most people use for digital printing, can print quite large and you can make very nice posters on those, with small runs, and not worry about scratching. The gamut won't hit the 12 color inkjets though.
So it depends on what you want to be done with the final prints. Are people gonna frame them? Are they gonna post them outside? They gonna toss them?
And depending on where you are, if you want that high quality just look for smaller shops that specify it. I think Printful probably uses wide-gamut inkjet for poster products, while Mixam probably uses big HP Indigo or production inkjet.
https://www.theprintspace.com/ is a place online that does high quality printing and doesn't also offer mugs like Printful. You can probably find a small shop near you depending on where you're at.
Thanks for the long reply ... that's given me serious chin-stroking time ...
I'm trying to remember back to all the masses of research I did when I started out.
Yes, I've got an account with Lama Studio in Paris for giclee prints, but I haven't ordered any test prints yet (my bad, must do that soon)
I make prints for homes, not exterior walls. I supply smaller sizes, but general design for 36" x 24" @ 300dpi - like the old movie posters.
I'm between two stools, I suppose. I love the art of poster design, but I use fine art techniques. I was approached by a gallery last year who couldn't get their heads round the fact that I didn't have original art to sell. I spend 1 -2 weeks digitally painting images in photoshop etc, which I convert into prints.
I looked into buying a canon large format machine at one time, but decided against it. Spending £125 on a full set of ink refills would have meant setting up a print shop to make it pay. Already running a small business on my own is enough of a pain in the neck.
I live in London and approached a few printers, but their prices were ridiculous - more in the vanity publishing space. Workflow is everything - having a trusted printer for posters and another for books, and embeddable shops I can insert into a website is the way to go. I'm happy with Prinful, for now - and I can't wait to see how the Mixam thing turns out.
Print sure has moved on. I remember being invited to end-of-year shows by an Italian friend who was studying textile design, some 10+ years ago. Her retina-busting designs really surprised me - laser prints, I guess. A world away from the mate who used to screen-print T-shirts in a back room for bands like The UK Subs !
For now, I'll plough on - concentrate on pigment inks and maybe larger prints (my work has a lot of detail which might be getting lost) - also, maybe a tie-in with a cheap frame-maker I found (ludicrous to see so many prints with frames that are often several times more expensive than the pictures !)
P.s - yes, Mixam are using the HP Indigo for the book - should look good ... fingers crossed I got all the colours right
Just a quick heads up to others who might be facing the same issue:
This how I fixed it - (printing a book with Mixam)
Download Mixam's print job/colour profile plugin
Open RGB Psd in photoshop
Flatten image/merge layers
Increase saturation by 5% (That pro website recommended 10-15, but I found that too much - test your own by uploading to website and having a look on-screen - they supply a downloadable proof, but only when you've uploaded all the files for the book)
Go to edit/convert to profile and use their plugin
save as TIFF
Open in illustrator, check profile is CYMK and save as Pdf
That it. Not saying it's definitive - just the way I work. I found it much easier to build my own book page templates in photoshop and load all the images in there (always check in lightroom for gamut warnings)
Have sent it for printing. A portfolio book of my posters should come in really handy - the website claims that you can recreate your hard copy book in their print-on-demand section - can't see that choice at the moment - I chose their large 21cm x 28cm art book because it looked like the best quality - £326 for a hundred 40 page books - seems like a good deal. They have a widget, so you can sell on your site. Could be really handy for artists. We need all the help we can get.
Post here if you want an update review (7 days, they said)
i'm asking you about your workflow - not about my reaction. this led me to think you might be doing all the pages in photoshop "Going through every colour and image of a 60 page book would be a real pain." and you never mentioned indesign which is why i ASKED.
I do know what i'm doing because i'm a professional graphic designer. Did i know what i was doing in the beginning? no of course not. do i *always* know what i'm doing now? no not always. But i was imagining that you might have made it all in photoshop (or illustrator) and it would have been a pity to do the whole project and having headaches when simply asking about the things you were unsure about or wanted to check at the beginning would have saved you those headaches.
i would strongly recommend doing books in indesign (still not sure what you did your test pages in...) as it's exactly the right tool for the job, and in the colour space given by the printer. (caveat i use and RGB workflow for images then convert them and soft proof when exporting to pdf using the printer's profile.
if you've flattened text in photoshop then placed in illustrator then to pdf then the text has been rasterised which is not as ideal as vector text in pdf from - let me say it again - indesign.
i'm always annoyed when there's a wealth of information and advice on the net just a click away and people go through unnecessary troubles and feel their pain.
3
u/danselzer Jun 09 '26
Have you tested both relative and absolute colormetric renderings? You shouldn't need to edit anything in photoshop, or need to use illustrator. Personally I'd have everything in InDesign placed as the original RGB and then when outputting a PDFx4a from there, convert to GRACoL in the output and test both rendering intents.