Gordon Woolf's Blog

Skating on the Photoshop sliders

I noticed that the occasional mono pages which one of our local newspapers runs had pictures which were very muddy. It's a strong possibility that they are preparing all their pages in colour and just accepting that some of them may be run in black and white but a little time really should be taken to adjust for the lack of colour before it becomes almost a forgotten art.

It's a couple of years since a DTP-er I know was having trouble coping with instructions from a printer that detailed their pic specs as no less than 5% highlight dot, 80% max shadow, and midtones of 35 to 40%. The printer then added that this particular press might want the midtones down by another 10 or 15%.

That seems like a lot of old newspaper presses I know. Though, on second thoughts, they'd be hard pressed to hold a 5% highlight dot. My instructions on one paper were to drag both sliders in Photoshop in significantly, then drag the gamma slider across most of the way: no point in talking numbers, this was like engraving with a chainsaw -- provided you could hardly see anything on screen, there was a chance the final result would be fine.

The really amazing thing is that the final results were quite good.

This is the skill in working without color, and it is a good idea to ask a printer to show you what the original looks like for any black-and-white photos that look good (and maybe to give you the file) so you can see what you have to produce. Once you know what an original should look like on your screen, it is less necessary to work by the numbers. And some of those movements in the sliders within Photoshop can be far more than you would try without seeing an example.

The same principles apply to photocopying. Color is more forgiving than mono, but it is still worth learning some of the old skills. They can produce better color pics too.

And why do some pages have to run in black and white? That is because it does not matter to a large web press whether it is printing one color or many. It is the total number of plates which matter. A press can have the paper run from the reel (web) in many different ways so if fewer color plates are needed then more pages can be printed in the one run. So, some late ads can be accomodated without a second run and collating the two sections if some of the existing pages can be printed in one color instead of four.

'Large print' is not just type set larger

An interesting suggestion I saw on a publisher forum a while ago was to produce a large print edition and to just reduce the pages of this to make the standard edition. The logic was that some of the readers for which the book was intended were sufferers of diabetes, which often brings sight problems.

Unfortunately the internationally researched standards for large print books, are not just an enlarged form of normal typesetting. And there is a big difference in producing books for those who are substantially sight impaired, and books for those of us who may have a slight deterioration in sight within the normal ranges of variation with age.

A chapter in the current edition of Type & Layout (the book by Colin Wheildon republished by The Worsley Press) -- although this is a chapter in the additional material by Geoffrey Heard -- does describe how preparing a book for the non-fluent reader is different to preparing a book for a fluent reader who may have minor sight problems, or no problems at all.

Just one quick example: although Wheildon's research showed that for reasonably fluent readers, justified serif type is by far the most readable, that is not true for someone who is less fluent, either through education or sight.

The chapter also includes information on the alternative of "Clear Type", a standard developed by the Royal National Institute for the Blind, with standards which, while being acceptable to a wide range of those with site problems, is more acceptable to others. While tending towards sans faces it does accept fonts with a good serif definition such as Bookman.

I would therefore warn against producing a smaller version of a large type, or even "Clear Type" book as a normal edition.

If the text of a book is correctly tagged in its preparation it would be a very simple matter to run it through with alternative layout specifications. I'd estimate an hour or two in a program such as InDesign, maybe even less in an entirely tag based layout program such as TeX.

There will need to be an entire new round of research into legibility on ebook readers.

Software that refuses to die

How many software programs from 1994 are you still using?

When I upgraded to Windows 7 and chose the 64-bit version, I expected to say goodbye to some of the pieces of software that I've used for many years.

But my barcode creation software, UPCTools, bought in 1994, refuses to die...it just keeps on working, now with its fifth operating system since it first ran in Windows 95 (or was it Windows 3.1?).

Admittedly it now runs in XP Mode, but I can select it from the Start menu of Windows 7, and then just use the UPC Tools menu item "copy" to copy the result in to InDesign (which was no more than a twinkle in the eye of some of the software people at Aldus when this software was written by Jerry Whiting at Azalea Software). The barcode fonts, which were in Type 1 Postscript format, installed in the Windows 7 font folder by just dragging them in en masse. When viewed now within InDesign those fonts show up as just one font with eight styles (to suit three inkspread requirements plus half height versions. 

Yes that is Windows 7 and the software running does say Copyright 1994. Some software was written with the future in mind!

Incidentally, to get software that runs in the XP virtual environment to show up in the Start menu of Windows 7 you have to put a shortcut in the "All Users" subfolder of the Start menu in XP and then reboot your PC. It took me a while to work that one out.

Of course I'm not suggesting you should buy the 1994 version of UPCTools but if you are looking for barcode software that will work in to the next decade, You'll find lots of info about barcodes in general at http://www.azalea.com/FAQ/

Overall, I'm happy with the decision to upgrade and the computer with its extra memory is performing well -- not a BSOD since the upgrade, though I was previously thinking it had to be replaced.

Which page layout program?

I recently added a feature page to this blog titled The DTP contenders: which page layout program for you? which lists very brief comments and contacts for some 17 page layout programs. Some you may never have heard of but many may provoke disrtant memories and you'll be surprised that not only are they still around but that they have been updated.

Most have free trial versions which give the opportunity for you to see whether they suit your purposes but also produce a file which will print -- from your own computer printer or by the printing company you intend to use.

I welcome your comments. Already several changes have been made based on responses to my tweets when I first revised the page from the original much shorter version which was published many years ago.

As well as the link in this blog, you will find the page under DTP Contenders in the menu bar near the top of this page.

Give your Printing Problems the Binary Chop!

The Binary Chop isn't a new form of karate. It reverses the power of the computer by calculating using two digits, the equivalent of on and off, just as the computer does.

There are many problems with printing — in fact as a consultant, I have more calls about printing problems than any other aspect of desktop publishing — but the most common problem can easily be solved using the Binary Chop.

This problem is that a file just refuses to print.

Firstly, check that a known good file will still print. If it does, then it is almost certain that the problem is with the non-printing file, and not with your printer or network. You could also try creating a PDF of the file. And, if that works, try printing from the PDF.

Here are a series of other steps to take:

1. Make a copy of the file under a new name and check whether this prints (sometimes the process of re-ordering and compression in file size which occurs from a Save as… command will solve the problem).
2. If you are on a network, try printing the file from the computer to which the printer is attached (which may also enable you to check whether the printer begins to accept information and whether this continues for some time before the printer returns to Idle mode. You can also check this on networks by following the progress of the job from your computer using the network software).
3. Using the copy of the file, try printing without graphics by using the Omit graphics selection under print Options if this exists. If the file prints then selectively delete and restore graphics files until you isolate the one causing the problem.
4. If the file has multiple pages, send half the pages, then the other half. This is the first application of the Binary Chop; by halving the non-printing pages each time, until you can isolate, hopefully, a single non-printing page. If you have more than one non-printing page, look for typefaces or graphics which they have in common.
5. Take one non printing page and cut and paste half the objects to a new file. Try both halves. If one half prints, you know your problem is almost certainly in the other half. Either way, continue halving the number of objects until you isolate a single object which will not print. See below for a solution if both halves print but not the whole.
6. If everything else prints, go back to the original page, make another copy, delete just the offending item, and, hopefully, your page will print.
7. Replace the offending object, which may be a graphic or a piece of type.

Do-it-yourself publishing

"I've just got a price for laying out my new magazine/book/other printed project and it is a lot of money. Should I buy InDesign or QuarkXPress to do my own layout?"

That's the kind of email I get directly or see on email lists and forums just about every week. I'm an enthusiastic user of InDesign but the last thing I'm going to do is tell such a potential publisher is to rush off to the Adobe web site and buy it.

The first thing I'll ask is: "Have you costed in the time and training (either personal or by means of reading and practising)?"

I'm all for such a person learning to use InDesign if he or she will take the time to learn to use it and, in the case of a book, will use it for many other tasks in future.

After many years of using Ventura, then PageMaker, I did not do a book in InDesign until I had worked on a number of smaller jobs to make sure that I could work efficiently in the program. It is a very powerful program, but that makes it very easy to do a bad job.

There is also the likely situation that a newcomer will get quoted a lot more for a layout job by a designer than an experienced publisher would be charged for the same work. The book layout jobs I take outside of my own books, I do only for experienced publishers and know that, most times, I will only have to do the job once, so can quote lower prices. As an extreme example, when I did tabloid newspaper layouts I quoted $20 a page for work from newspaper publishers -- and $100 a page for anyone else. Subsequently I just stopped doing the $100 a page jobs as they were not profitable, whereas the $20 a page was.

Yes, the would-be publisher should by all means buy InDesign but should also realize that this involves learning yet another skill. Do you have the time for that? In general the answer has to be "no" unless you can find a skilled person who is prepared to charge you on a basis that they are also teaching you to do the job. That designer will expect and deserve a high fee -- but it may be the cheapest long term solution for the publisher.

Flying coffee cups and washing keyboards

I've seen plenty of near-full coffee cups go flying in publishers' offices, so I'm not ashamed to send back a manuscript with a slight sign that it was read while I was drinking or eating. I'm sure authors will consider that better than receiving back a manuscript which has not been open. (I'm told some stick a hair or similar across pages to check -- in the manner that crime novel detectives would stick a matchstick across a door to see if anyone had entered a room).

However, at one newspaper where I worked, the IT manager felt it neccessary to put up a large notice in the copy editors' area which read something like "If you must drink coffee at the desk, please take it without sugar!"

Apparently keyboards and terminals would survive the coffee, and he regularly had one or two keyboards hanging from the partitions in his workshop after being washed with a hose; the sugar is what does the damage. But I don't think any editor or publisher would dare to ban coffee for copy editors, certainly not on the late shift.

And I do know that several of those photographs from correspondents and readers which "went missing" mysteriously, were lost after being smothered in a takeaway curry.

I'm surprised how many lost items turned up in no fit state to return when I had to move everything out to have my office recarpeted. However I'm more worried by all the things I can't find since moving everything back in. I know where they used to be.

However, if you do spill something on a keyboard and decide to take the risk of washing and drying, the one thing not to do is to undo those screws underneath. At one time keyboards had little holders for the springs to fit in. Many modern ones do not, so any attempt to open them results in a spray of several hundred parts over a wide area. It's quite impressive.

I've just this minute thought that if one could loosen those screws just enough one could produce this effect at the first touch by someone else...

Anyone else remember those old DOS programs that could sit looking like the old C: prompt but when anything was typed in would bring up a message of something like "Checking hard drive -- about to go into cleaning cycle" and manage to make the built-in speaker which usually just beeped produce a passable imitation of a washing machine spin cycle?

Rich blacks

I was asked this question a while ago "concerning black color in CMYK printing". The questioner said: "I know that black process color doesn't give you 'real' black from the print, and you have to mix it with others to get darkest possible black. Can you tell me which combination gives the darkest possible black color (extra black) without any 'light' points?"

There's no easy answer to that...

The black you get via CMYK (100%K) is as black as you'll get from just using black ink in any other way (though genuine process black ink is somewhat more transparent than the more normal spot black), but it is true that you get a richer looking black from mixing in a little of the other colours.

The problem comes with small text -- if you have 6 or 8pt text printed in more than one of the CMYK colours and the registration isn't perfect, you'll get a blurred effect that will look far worse than any improvement you'll get from the richer colour.

The compromise for many is to use a small proportion of yellow (say 10%) which won't show up badly if you get a slight yellow edge to the text and to use a small percentage of the background colour.

Another way is to create a "rich black" with a small proportion of say Y and M and apply this only to larger text sizes. The most common combination seems to be 100% K with 20% Magenta to give a warmer black, and maybe 20% Y. Using Cyan instead of Magenta gives a cooler black.

It's also possible to use higher proportions of the other colours, but then you come up against the problem of the total amount of ink you are putting on the paper -- and this will depend on the paper and the press. It can be as low as around 250% for uncoated papers (taking 100% as the equivalent to printing one colour solid). Overprinted black on solid colour need to be watched especially for this danger.

So, it comes again, as with so many such problems, to needing the advice of an experienced press operator, who will have a good idea from experience of what works in specific circumstances.

1990s: peak time for newspaper efficiency?

In clearing out some old paperwork I came across my figures for the setting up of a joint production facility for a number of monthly and quarterly tabloid newspapers in 1993. I wonder whether, despite all the improvements in computers and software, we are achieving any extra throughput today. Was this in fact the peak time of newspaper DTP, and while we may be producing better pages are we doing them less efficiently?

The report included a spreadsheet of weekly page production ranging from 30 to 80 tabloid pages a week but the initial expectation was 50 pages a week:

Copy preparation: 12 hours
Ad setting: 40 hours
Page layout: 35 hours
Scanning: 15 hours
Comping: 12 hours

Total: 114 hours per week (approx 3 people) which was considered in the report to be a "considerable" overestimate of "normal" time requirements, allowing for errors, breakdowns, waiting times, etc but not for staff absence.

I found another report in which I stated that my expectation for the page layout function was about 20 minutes a page (less than half the above estimate) from reasonably skilled operators and maybe 40 minutes for page one and any special feature page.

The comping part (with its equipment requirement for layout tables, cutting boards and waxer) showed that it was still an expectation that ads would be output individually, trimmed to size and waxed into place on the pages, though editorially output would be to an A3 laser (most ads would be output to an A4 laser).

Required equipment would be: 3 x 486 PCs and one AT or better plus 1 each A3 and A4 lasers, plus scanner, fax, photocopier, desks, benches etc. Software recommended was PageMaker and CorelDraw.

I also noted that there should be no provision for copy inputting. This would be done at the originating publication or, if required, should be done by outworkers.