InDesign gradient question

[Colorblind]

Hi, I have a very simple InDesign document. Bottom layer has a K only radial gradient fill, middle layer has a lozenge shaped cyan+black gradient fill and top layer is a rectangle shape (die) with fill of none and stroke of spot overprinting. Now if I export to default PDFX/1a preset (preserving spot), the gradient in the resulting PDF is slightly different if I leave the die layer on compared to leaving it off. I find it is being flattened harsher, less gradual when the die is left on. Anyone else ever experienced this? I have the InDesign file + 2 PDFs but can't seem to be able to attach them here. You can get them here though: https://www.yousendit.com/download/TEhXQ3QvcGtBNkdwSHNUQw

 

[leonardr]

Hi, I have a very simple InDesign document. Bottom layer has a K only radial gradient fill, middle layer has a lozenge shaped cyan+black gradient fill and top layer is a rectangle shape (die) with fill of none and stroke of spot overprinting. Now if I export to default PDFX/1a preset (preserving spot), the gradient in the resulting PDF is slightly different if I leave the die layer on compared to leaving it off. I find it is being flattened harsher, less gradual when the die is left on. Anyone else ever experienced this? I have the InDesign file + 2 PDFs but can't seem to be able to attach them here. You can get them here though: https://www.yousendit.com/download/TEhXQ3QvcGtBNkdwSHNUQw

Just another great reason to move from PDF/X-1a to PDF/X-4

 

[Colorblind]

Thank you for your reply Leonard. PDF/X-1a is still the requested format by most publishers I'm dealing with (I'm a content supplier). I just never noticed that the fact of adding a thin overprinting stroke box on top of a gradient would produce such a change at flattening time.

 

[PrePressKD]

Colorblind - This may sound odd, but try making you dieline a standard PMS (Book) color (i.e. PANTONE 342 C set to overprint) and not a CMYK-built spot color. If that doesn't give you the results you're looking for, go old school. Make two files; one with the dieline left as CMYK (not spot) with the stroke set to overprint and one without the dieline. Use the first for proofing and the second for production.

 

[Colorblind]

Colorblind - This may sound odd, but try making you dieline a standard PMS (Book) color (i.e. PANTONE 342 C set to overprint) and not a CMYK-built spot color.

Already tried that before posting. Also tried changing all sorts of other PDF export settings (compression to zip instead of jpeg) but no success so far. Thanks for your help anyway.

 

[CathieH]

Have you tried moving the layers so that the die layer is below the gradient layer? Just thinking out of the box here...or moving the line to the layer with the gradient?

 

[pacart]

What about exporting as an eps file, then opening in illustrator and creating your pdf there, maybe its an indesign thing. Or make your background gradient in photoshop and see if that helps.

 

[CathieH]

Pacart, good suggestion about creating your gradients in Photoshop and importing them. That might be the answer.

 

[Colorblind]

Have you tried moving the layers so that the die layer is below the gradient layer? Just thinking out of the box here...or moving the line to the layer with the gradient?

Cathie, tried that as well. No success. Thanks.

 

[Colorblind]

What about exporting as an eps file, then opening in illustrator and creating your pdf there, maybe its an indesign thing. Or make your background gradient in photoshop and see if that helps.

Just tried exporting the gradient art as eps and also made a Photoshop version and saved as tiff. Placed them back in ID and as soon as the die layer is there, InDesign flattens differently. Even tried the .ps to distiller road (please Lord, forgive me) with no success. So it's definitely an InDesign thing... Thank you.

 

[pacart]

So why do you need the die line in there? Since it is just a die and not part of the art, take it out.

 

[Colorblind]

So why do you need the die line in there? Since it is just a die and not part of the art, take it out.

Good question. Because we have a PDF workflow/rip that nests the file until a proof is needed. So we export as PDFX/1a since it's by far still the most requested PDF format (you'd be surprised how many printers still don't want to deal with RGB to CMYK conversions and live transparency). Sometimes we need a proof with die on, sometimes with die off (in that case we instruct the rip to not print the die plate -- since it's set as overprint it shouldn't make a difference, it won't leave a white area). It makes no sense exporting a PDFX4 (my workflow would handle it just fine) for proofing purpose on our end while sending out PDFX/1a... Anyway, that's not the point. I just don't get how a fill area of "none" combined with an overprinting spot stroke affects flattening this way...

 

[Drewstre]

Hmmm... it sounds like the dieline is an InDesign polygon with a spot stroke? Make sure there are no transparency effects on that polygon (Effects palette -> Clear Transparency). Maybe try exporting as an EPS with nothing but the dieline, and then Placing that EPS back in? Also, is the dieline spot color a color created within ID, or is it a spot color brought in with a PDF/EPS/etc? Can you create a new spot color for the die, nuke the old one and try again?

 

[Stephen Marsh]

I rasterized both PDF files into Photoshop at 300ppi CMYK. I then layered one over the other in difference blend mode, then flattened. I then ran an equalize command to exaggerate the differences. I then ran curves to exaggerate the differences again. The only pixel difference between both files was the die! Have you done a test print to see if output to print shows any difference between the two jobs?

On another note - radial gradients are very unforgiving, they can usually show banding very easily. In Photoshop, one can create a gradient with "dither" and or in addition one may add minor noise. As far as I know, InDesign does not offer these features to "vector" gradients - although with an inner glow object effect one can add some minor noise.

Stephen Marsh

 

[Colorblind]

Hmmm... it sounds like the dieline is an InDesign polygon with a spot stroke? Make sure there are no transparency effects on that polygon (Effects palette -> Clear Transparency). Maybe try exporting as an EPS with nothing but the dieline, and then Placing that EPS back in? Also, is the dieline spot color a color created within ID, or is it a spot color brought in with a PDF/EPS/etc? Can you create a new spot color for the die, nuke the old one and try again?

Drewstre, already tried all of that, with same result. Thanks.

 

[CathieH]

Maybe this is a stupid question, but have tried the oldy but goody favorite of deleting the layer, saving the file as a different name, then opening it and creating a new die layer?

This is boggling my mind.

 

[Colorblind]

I rasterized both PDF files into Photoshop at 300ppi CMYK. I then layered one over the other in difference blend mode, then flattened. I then ran an equalize command to exaggerate the differences. I then ran curves to exaggerate the differences again. The only pixel difference between both files was the die! Have you done a test print to see if output to print shows any difference between the two jobs?

On another note - radial gradients are very unforgiving, they can usually show banding very easily. In Photoshop, one can create a gradient with "dither" and or in addition one may add minor noise. As far as I know, InDesign does not offer these features to "vector" gradients - although with an inner glow object effect one can add some minor noise.

Stephen Marsh

Stephen, thank you for taking the time to download the files and do your tests. I also rasterized in Photoshop (at 600 dpi) and you're right, both rasterized versions look the same. But when both PDFs are viewed in Acrobat Pro (400% blowup top left area, separation/overprint preview on), you can see a slight difference as in these Photoshop enhanced screen captures.

 

[Stephen Marsh]

Stephen, thank you for taking the time to download the files and do your tests. I also rasterized in Photoshop (at 600 dpi) and you're right, both rasterized versions look the same. But when both PDFs are viewed in Acrobat Pro (400% blowup top left area, separation/overprint preview on), you can see a slight difference as in these Photoshop enhanced screen captures.

Colorblind, as I said, radial gradients are tricky! They are "perfect" and often lack any noise to break up possible banding. If a transform is applied (curve, profile, softproof) then there will likely be some sort of alteration of the data and banding will appear.

As the Photoshop test proves - both files are the same, so I would bet that this is a display issue.


Stephen Marsh

 

[tobiv]

i've downloaded the files too and don't find any differences between the two pdf files at all expect of the die line. i'm coming from an packaging background and we have on our job files (mostly illu but indy too) multiple spot colour for annotations. i've never seen any differences with or without them and it would realy surprise me if there are any...

did you compare the percentage value of the cmyk channels in both file or did you only compare them visually?

 

[Colorblind]

Stephen, tobiv, thanks to both of you for your time. It must be a display thing in Acrobat or I'm in need for holidays...