CMYK or RGB to show your clients

[bejamshi]

Hi,

When you design something, If for press, I am sure you use the CMYK profile. Then as you know the colors are less vibrant than RGB for online presentation to your clients before going to press.

One solution that I have found is to use the RGB pallate and once client approves, then create a CMYK output of the same files for press.

What I want to know is how do you present your colors online to your clients for approval. Do you create two versions of the same file, one for RGB the other for press?

 

[telenow2002]

Hi bejamshi, just picked this one off Twitter and thought I ought to clarify your exact circumstances here.

Are you talking about publishing your content online and in print?

Or do you mean you present it to your client via an online portal/browser something that is destined for print?

tunicca-blog.com

 

[bejamshi]

It is meant for print, but i wish to show it to my client online. But RGB looks better online than CMYK, even file size is bigger if I send it via pdf/x for them to view.

This is only for them to view online for approval.

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

I normally send sRGB for clients. (with simulated overprint). This is the same standard as web.

 

[roel78]

But RGB looks better online than CMYK

Can you print in RGB? Why would you send RGB-files to a client? The colours won't match the print then, would they? It's all about predictable colour.

If you send a RGB-pdf, you have to give the pdf an CMYK output-intent. Make sure you view it in overprint-mode and simulate black ink in Acrobat Pro.

Does your client have a calibrated monitor? It's also important to view the monitor with good ambient light e.g.

 

[bejamshi]

No, clients monitor as you know looks different than my monitor, so no matter CMYK or RGB proofs they will still see them on their screen as false, not true to pantone or cymk swatch booklet.

So I guess I just answered my question, that there is no right way to present, I have presented screen captures from a pdf/x and send that out and still client complains about colors looking too dull, so I have to educate them about how colors look different on every monitor. Hell even on print from press to press, different printers and so on the colors will look different. So many factors too many to really have it predictable.

I am just curious after so many years of advancements in every field of technology, yet when it comes to color proofing we are still wondering what is accurate color presentation.

 

[Colorblind]

I have to agree with roel78 on this one, if it's for printing, leave it as CMYK and give it the appropriate output intent or embed the good ICC profile. It's just going to be one less variable to worry about...

 

[bejamshi]

ok, but they keep saying, brighten that color, and i keep telling them that it is for print.

 

[roel78]

So many factors too many to really have it predictable

If you can control all those factors, you'll love your job

I have read this book recently. This book delivers a clearly defined process for creating, preparing, and outputting digital files for optimal results:
Peachpit: CMYK 2.0: A Cooperative Workflow for Photographers, Designers, and Printers, Adobe Reader

 

[bejamshi]

Thanks for the book review, i love peach pit

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

Since the monitor is RGB it is no difference to send a colour managed RGB or a CMYK with embedded ICC. Since the only unmanaged RGB workspace ought to be sRGB, and that consumer printers assume sRGB make sRGB (saving the diskspace for the ICC) the obvious way to send files to the customer if they want small files over web or email. Other option is a PDFx wich includes output intent, but that requires more from your customer.

If it is a graphic or picture you can use the "save for web" and keep your original intact.
An sRGB file is most likely to look the same on all devices.

 

[roel78]

@ Lukas

If you send an sRGB-file, make sure you convert it from the source to the CMYK-output and then to sRGB. Otherwise the colours won't match the print. Altough I see no advantage for doing it this way?

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

@roel78

Well if the images are already adapted to be within gamut then it is really not a problem, because they will be printable. You will find that many customers do not match the printed and monitor by holding them up side by side, so white point compensation is a little overkill, and will cause more confusion than clarity.
For Uncoated, yes it can be necessary to convert first, but remember the eye is subjective and has very poor colour memory, therefore the perception of being right is more important that the absolute right.

 

[roel78]

ok, but they keep saying, brighten that color, and i keep telling them that it is for print.

@Lukas
You can't use this RGB-file as an exact colourreference. You can offer the client a proofprint (GMG - Cromalin e.g.) or a wetproof on the press. So if the client wants to see a colourreference he has to pay for it.

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

Yes hard copy proofs are easier for a client to comprehend

Yes hard copy proofs are easier for a client to comprehend

@roel
Basically yes. It depends on the scope of the product. (Usually you get to know what kind of customer and different customers may need to be treated differently)

If the monitor IS calibrated and has the necessary dynamic range, AND the correct viewing conditions a PDFx will work fine, and is the esiest form of softproofing.

If the monitor is an uncertainty factor, then one or several key pages as hardcopy proof would quickly teach a client how to read the sRGB PDF. If they are not willing to invest in a propper proofing environment, then that signals a threshhold of tollerance IMO. Teaching customers to view uncoated proofs is hardest, they will tell you they want more colour and the only relevant answer is to tell them that means they must choose a different paper. Consolidating the customers expectations and what they are willing to pay for is key in any business.

 

[John Clifford]

Can you print in RGB? Why would you send RGB-files to a client? The colours won't match the print then, would they? It's all about predictable colour.

If you send a RGB-pdf, you have to give the pdf an CMYK output-intent. Make sure you view it in overprint-mode and simulate black ink in Acrobat Pro.

Does your client have a calibrated monitor? It's also important to view the monitor with good ambient light e.g.

RGB is transmissive. There is NO Red Green Blue ink combination to "print RGB" RGB can ONLY be viewed on a monitor or TV. Similarly you can only SIMULATE CMYK on a monitor. CMYK is reflective/subtractive. CMY is the negative colors from RGB. ALL printing is either CMYK or spot colors. The problem with color shift when viewing CMYK is that there are far more colors in RGB than can be reproduced in CMYK. When you simulate CMYK on screen the colors are less bright because the monitor is restricting colors to the colors that can actually be printed, but they are not ink on paper and can NEVER truly represent how a final print product will look.

If you have clients who require critical color, you cannot just send them a PDF and expect that, under any circumstances, they will be seeing what they would see in a good, color-managed, printed proof.

 

[stueey]

There's almost no need to work in anything other than rgb if using Adobe programs, just set up the 'Print Preview' function and and you can work in rgb (faster in Photoshop as using 3 channels and and not 4 and all the filters work). The only time I ever work in CMYK in Photoshop is if I need to have very specific black requirement as all RIPs these days support RGB files.

The best work around for calming down the colours on line that I have found so far is to convert my film to CMYK and then save for web. Saving for web will convert it back to RGB but having converted it to CMYK can help sort out colours like the extreme blues and greens possible in an RGB file.

No matter what you do you will always be at the mercy of the client's monitor so over the years I've found it helps a lot to briefly explain that print can't do some of the bright colours that a monitor can display and that they can see this for themselves if they print to their inkjet printer.

 

[otherthoughts]

For what it's worth?

For what it's worth?

It would seem to me, that if one wants to have any meaningful discussion about "color proofing" on screen with remote customers . Then the scope of one's color management has to grow to encompass those customer's displays.

In other words, you have to establish some type of meaningful color management link between yourself and the customer. Without a color managed link between yourself and the customer, the display screen your customer might approve of, really hasn't any credible relationship to what your press will print from it.

By way of contrast, in days gone by, the printing house generated a Hard-Copy, Contract Proof and submitted it to their customers for color approval and sign-off.

For these "days gone by" hard-copy proofs, the color management protocols and practices were solely within and under the control of the print house, and if the print house indeed strayed too far from the, customer approved, hard-copy, contract proof, during the press-run, then the print house could be held liable and accountable for any significant deviations.

So the way I see it, there are fundamentally two categories to look at here,

1. Shops that actively color manage what their customer's see on their screens and will stand by those display results to match the shop's press-runs, just as was customary with the hard-copy contract-proofs in days gone by.
2. Shops and customers that aren't as concerned with color management.

In my humble opinion, some of the talented posts above seem to address the first category most directly, and some posts seem to address the second category most directly.

I guess what I am really suggesting is that a quality control level describing the target category needs to be established in order to make relevant any debates about the merits and/or drawbacks of the particular methodology? What works for a publication such as National Geographic Magazine, typically will not work for the "Quick & Dirty" direct mailing house.

Some day we might arrive at a uniform color management technology/scheme that works for one-and-all. But I don't believe that, that day is today?

Best Regards
OT