What form of printing is best for art book quality, high-gloss magazines?

[Flaneur]

I've been (gladly) thrown into the world of print production and am honestly at the initial point where I just feel as if I'm digging holes in water. I'm researching what form of printing, or specifically what printing process (offset, digital, etc.) yields the absolute best quality for an art magazine (run of 5,000-10,00) on high-gloss paper. Along the lines of FMR (best quality magazine i've ever seen, though Italian and virtually unknown over here), Communication Arts, or some of Aperture's high gloss releases. Any where I turn on-line, there seems to be vast contradictions and no real definitive answer. Basically, if you were looking to attempt to create a gorgeous art magazine where definition and color quality concerning full page spreads was utterly essential and cost was not an issue...what process would you look to use? I know it's a pretty dang vague question...but I have to start somewhere. And to tack on another question...probably best for another thread...what paper stock would you choose?

 

[bgardner]

You never get asked to often on the topic of what would you do if cost was not an issue. First Answer, offset is the way to go, I dont think anyone can argue that point. You would definitely get better results on a Coated sheet, and a company who can offset at a 200 line screen at the bare minimum. Paper selection is not my strong point as far as what type of coated sheet to use, so I wil leave that one alone..

 

[ajr]

Regarding paper stock, speak to a paper company get them to send you samples etc. They would probably recommend a suitable printer. If they think they will get a sale out of it they will bend over backwards.

A

 

[Flaneur]

To bgardner. Thanks for your insight. I'm not sure if it's simply a matter of a digital printing company stirring up hype, though my research keeps leaning towards offset only to be knocked uncertain by articles concerning the advances of digital presses, i.e. HP Indigo, and claims that not only is there not much difference these days, but that the digital press has a leg up on offset when it comes to quality. Maybe the uncertainty means I should just stick with the tried and true.

 

[khasmir]

If it comes down to pure quality (detail, color, ...) then without any doubt offset is the way to go for books and magazines. I would only consider digital printing for very low volumes. Also note that most digital presses only support a small printing size and will thus usually print single pages. If you have a magazine that consists of 8up signatures or bigger then digital printing is not even an option anymore.

I see you mention HP indigo for example but these are usually narrow band web presses for printing adhesive labels. Maybe you can also print single A4 pages but if you want something like a center spread then you are stuck again.

But what you really need to consider is what screening you will use to get the best possible quality.
If you want a lot of detail in the images you will need to print around 200 lpi but then the stability on the press can become an issue.

I'm not sure if you are working in a print shop or not but I would recommend looking into advanced screening techniques like Concentric Screening (EskoArtwork).
This will give you more detail, brighter colors, better stability on press, ...

 

[gordo]

Offset.

And FM screening - FM at 20 microns will give you near photographic reproduction - even when viewed under a loupe. 10 micron FM is photo quality - but there are only a few who can do this.
For top quality FM will beat any AM screening variant.
I can send/point you to samples if you like.

best gordo

 

[khasmir]

I have found that FM screening can sometimes be difficult to control (measuring) and not always easy to keep it stable on the press.
But the best solutions to get the most detail are probably Concentric Screening (AM) from EskoArtwork and Staccato (FM) from Kodak.

News display - EskoArtwork

KODAK STACCATO Screening - Kodak's Graphic Communications Group

 

[insanedave]

Definitely offset - FM screen. The quality of digital printing has increased, and in most cases looks very good. But for your application, wanting the best color and photo-reproduction - offset is the way to go.
As khasmir stated, a book on a digital press with a 5000 print qty, the cost would end up more than offset and not quite as good quality. The only way digital would work for something like this is if you were doing variable data on multiple pages. Think of digital printing as small run, targeted pieces. (which are quite effective)
As far as which paper - definately contact a local paper vendor. They will let you know which sheet would produce the desired result - shade, coating, etc.
And, we have not had any trouble with FM screening and have been using it for quite a few years now. if you haven't seen this, ask your printer for samples of both 200 lpi and FM screen samples - if they don't use FM, find someone who does. I think you will see the difference right away.

 

[michaelejahn]

You asked "what form of printing, or specifically what printing process (offset, digital, etc.) yields the absolute best quality for an art magazine (run of 5,000-10,00) on high-gloss paper."

While your somewhat "short" run kinda sorta implies that you may have meant to add "well, my magazine has a small circulation which means I can't REALLY afford the very very best"...

Me, If I had no budget, and I wanted the absolute best quality - I would find a rotogravure shop in Germany. Offset is down right ugly in comparison to Rotogravure - no comparison - but this printing process makes little sence for runs under 1 million.

I figured I would just throw that in there, as most high end coffee table books are printing using rotogravure.

Otherwise, stick with Gordo said - comments like "difficult to control (measuring) and not always easy to keep it stable on the press." - that is true of any process that is different than you are used to.

- if the pressman has not implemented stringent process control is unfamiliar with how to print FM screening, they will have problems or sure, but like printing hexachrome or something more exotic, it is not inherently 'unstable' - just different.

Michael Jahn
Jahn & Associates
PDF Color Conversion Specialist
1824 North Garvin Avenue
Simi Valley
California 93065
Office: (805) 527 8130
Cell: (805) 217 6741
Email: [email protected]
Skype: michaelejahn
Twitter: Twitter / michaelejahn

 

[Flaneur]

Gordo, thanks for your help. The FM at 20 microns sounds right...honestly only because you mentioned near photographic reproduction. I'll look into it further. I would love point samples if you could send them. Our key will be reproducing high quality macro art shots. Once again I bring up FMR magazine. Here's a link to a quick overview. fmr They've been making this magazine since the early 80's and their printing quality has never deviated from simply amazing. Our task will be to match, and if possible surpass their level of quality. I know all of this sounds really idealistic and possibly unrealistic due to cost, my own print-world knowledge, etc. but...I'm working with some very connected people who are very confident I can fill in these technical gaps. Trust me, I tried my best to convince them that print-production is a daunting career in itself but...alas...we do have a couple of years before we launch the first issue. I just wanted to re-affirm that although this may seem far-fetched, sophomoric, whathaveyou, these are very serious queries. And by all means, we are definitely scouting out printers...once, of course, I can figure out what specific type of printing is best. Get in touch with me via [email protected] for my address. Thanks again.
-Will "Not waving but drowning" G.

 

[Flaneur]

Our run will be limited to 5,000-10,000 copies only due to market demand. How many art magazines out there, especially non-profit, run over 10,000? Unfortunately, there's just no stateside demand for it. We will be looking to go international after we gauge an initial response. Bring a high-quality art magazine with a run of over 10,000 in the U.S. to my attention and i'll show you a bastardized art magazine which will be flipped through and tossed aside. i.e. Juxtapoze. Sorry, more of a personal rant there. Price, seriously, is not an issue. Also isn't rotogravure used for long runs (in the millions) and though it is used for art books for it's depth it's not necessarilly the cleanest of options? Maybe I've heard that was the case for rotogravure with type...hmmm, so does that mean art book publishers have dual printing processes? As in, one for the art photo (rotogravure) and one for the text? Is Die Keure one of those German printers you speak of? Anyhoo...on the subject of rotogravure...if it's silly to print 5-10,000 copies via rotogravure, should I be looking into sheet-fed gravure?

 

[lfelton]

Sounds like fun!

I have nothing technical to add and know nothing about rotogravure, however when when we were researching a new press about 10 months ago, KBA showed us some samples printed in their factory. Most were of the types we were interested in testing, i.e. 300lpi AM, FM & FM/AM hybrid. However, they did pull out a couple of samples which they claimed were printed at 800lpi and these were pretty incredible. Way beyond contone photographic as far as I could see (no idea about the colour gamut). Very pretty, almost 3-d looking & very cool.

The plates would be way beyond what our CTP is capable of, but it was interesting that a top specification B2 press could produce that quality.

Maybe you could speak to Heidelberg/KBA/Komori directly and ask to be put in touch with people with the appropriate kit?

 

[UncleSam]

Concentric Screening at 310 lpi

Concentric Screening at 310 lpi

I would suggest you to look at the Concentric Screening at 310 lpi. It will much smoother compare to FM 10 micron dot printing. No grainy noise come from FM. It simply the best screening I ever see period. It just like photograph by your bare eye. If you want to see it yourself, see if you can pick up a Nikon Winter 2008 catalog. It's printed by Concentric Screening.

 

[gordo]

RE: Uncle Sam wrote:
" would suggest you to look at the Concentric Screening at 310 lpi. It will much smoother compare to FM 10 micron dot printing. No grainy noise come from FM."

I, and many printers, beg to differ.
Concentric at 310 lpi is indistinguishable from AM at 310 lpi even under a loupe. You still have screen angles and rosettes. FM is not inherently grainy - some CTP/plate/FM screening combinations may appear grainy. Generally, modern FM screening provide smooth tones, and that is especially true of Kodak Staccato - arguably the most popular/most used FM screening implementation. For example, many paint manufacturer's brochures are printed with it because it allows them to print large flat screen tint builds (especially pastel colors) that simulate and look like flat paint swatches. If you are in the US or Canada, simply go to any Home Depot and pick up a copy of any Behr Paint brochures (esp. the faux finish ones) and compare, and examine under a loupe, to any other screening - its unlikely that even under 10x you'll be able to see the halftone screen. These have been printed 10 micron Staccato for about the past 8 years now.
Have a look at "LensWork" magazine. It's a small black and white magazine that covers fine art photography also done 10 micron.
Many museums/art galleries/art auction houses have their catalogs printed with Staccato - usually 20 micron, sometimes 10 - in order to delivery the highest fidelity reproduction in the art they are reproducing - no graininess, no moiré, no rosettes, no screen angle issues (e.g. the Frye Art Museum, Heffel Auctions.
If you can afford it, take a look at a copy of Antartica - Explorer Series and Pat and Rosemarie Keough home page. ANTARCTICA: Explorer Series, Volume 1 printed 10 micron Staccato. Sony, Leaf, and Canon brochures use this type of screening to show off the quality of their cameras.


best, gordo