Advice for printing an illustrated book

[mitch deoudes]

Apologies if this is the wrong sub-forum, but I couldn't find one dedicated to "printing advice" generally. Mods feel free to move this post to a more appropriate sub.

My partner & I are self-publishing a book of poetry & drawings. We've gotten samples from a dozen printing companies. Our initial reaction was: we preferred offset printing to digital. We also very much disliked glossy paper - it felt more like a magazine / photo book / children's book than a poetry book. Note: All the drawings will be black-and-white.

However, while the original concept was supposed to be mostly line art (think Shel Silverstein), we now plan on including illustrations that have subtle shading, fine details, and some that are digitally-sourced ("digital paintings"). We'd like to find a process / paper combination that will reproduce all of the styles well - and also the text, of course.

Reviewing the samples, we felt that 4-color offset printing on matte coated paper hit a reasonable sweet spot in terms of fidelity, contrast, and a minimum of artifacts (little dots). Does this sound reasonable?

Examples - none of which are from the book, these are just similar to the types of styles we expect:

Shaded: https://www.deviantart.com/nickbleb/art/deceiver-864624990

Detailed texture (ignore the color): https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/fs/f97cd654855235.596cd26312652.jpg

Toned background / gradients: https://www.deviantart.com/mohtah/art/56-864541548

High contrast: https://www.deviantart.com/chriscold/art/Zeriel-s-Light-459632078

Digital paint (thin lines, sharp edges): https://www.artstation.com/artwork/ELW81K

There are obviously a lot of things we need to learn... (Like "rich black" provides more contrast, but can produce chromatic aberration on small details: https://printninja.com/printing-res...lor-requirements/standard-black-vs-rich-black )

But what we're looking for is a sanity check on our choice of process & paper. We're still going for a "Where the Sidewalk Ends" feel, but with a wider variety of illustration styles.

------
UPDATE: a poster correctly pointed out that the number of units and the budget are important factors. Our initial run would be in the low hundreds, and the budget would be ~$2500 max. Divide that how you will. We've found one offset printer that meets those criteria, and will do a run of 250 (which is more than we need). If we only got 100-150 books, at ~$15 each, that would be acceptable... So long as they look neither like photocopies of a drawing, nor glossy photo books. We're going for something that feels like an old-tymey, cloth-bound hardback, but with good reproduction of the illustrations. (We realize that there is an inherent trade-off there. This post is just requesting a sanity check on what we think the best trade-off would be.)

UPDATE 2: in response to another poster's questions: Binding-wise, we're probably going hardcover case binding. The book is ~60 pages of art right now, so ~30 physical pieces of paper, plus whatever copyright / end matter pages. Will be going with some sort of heavier stock. Right now, the plan is for everything to be b&w.

UPDATE 3: suggested to us elsewhere online: "You may also want to consider looking at two-color offset, using black and grey duotones, That can give you the increased contrast you were talking about, with both richer blacks and the ability to hold subtle highlight details, without risking color shifts."

 

[Big Wave]

In my book, offset is the best. Decisions often comes down to money (or quantity.)

A matte coated stock allows a finer screen than uncoated stock. Desirable for fine details in color areas or to minimize the visibility of the dot screen.

If any of your art has very bright or unique colors that can't be reproduced in the CMYK color space, that could be something to also consider. Don't know if it applies. You can add additional spot colors if desired, for a price.

Do the CMYK conversion yourself so you are happy with colors.

Also keep in mind many inkjet proofs are not 100% matches to how the screen on the press will actually look. They're usually close enough simulations to give you an idea of color and look. With some extra budget or a bigger project, you can do one or two press proofs to see if there will be 3 or 4 dots at the end of a fine orange line and how it will look exactly.

Again, only throwing ideas out. Much depends on quantity and budget. Often budget in the real world means you do some but not all proofing you can do, get a great result, with a few small items you can improve on a second run.

 

[mitch deoudes]

Thanks for the reply. It sounds like we're on the right track, at least. I've updated the original post above with some more details, based on conversations I've had elsewhere, including quantity & budget.

As for color, right now the plan is for it all to be b&w. The example images I linked in the original post are pretty representative of the kind of content we expect. (But no color.)

 

[turbotom1052]

The full color images would of course require 4 color process. The black monotone images could be very nicely produced with 4color black and white. In order to print 4 color black and white, you will need very balanced scans so as not to "cast" the images and keep them looking monotone. Ive done a great deal of these types of images over the years, and have found that they produce very nicely with a super calendered sheet like Mowhawk Superfine cover or text, in 300 line screen rulings.

 

[mitch deoudes]

Thanks for the reply - to clarify: currently, the plan is for all b&w images.

I've not heard of super calendered paper until now. Google indicates it's lightweight & highly polished, but uncoated - correct? We're definitely going for a matte look, on heavy stock. Is super calendered likely to be less shiny than a coated matte stock, and is it available in heavier weights?

 

[turbotom1052]

Yes it is Mitch. Should be noted that you need to treat a super calendered sheet with kid gloves. You will find that super calendered will dry much slower, and be prone to setoff, if ink film thickness is not closely controlled. The good news is that a super calendered sheet will give your reproductions a vintage type of vibe. Mowhawk Paper would be the industry leader for such a sheet.

 

[alibryan]

Black ink on white stock is fine for reproducing black and white photos and for many printers it’s much easier to hold consistent color than a 4 color quad-tone would be. This is especially true when talking about short run quantities because by the time the press is just settling down and becoming stable, the run is over and done and so you’ll just get what you get...

Matte stock (not dull) is your best choice if you’re looking for photos that will pop but where the paper background has almost no shine at all. It actually almost looks like uncoated. Dull stock is a popular replacement choice for matte stock (seems like some printers maybe don’t even understand the difference) but it is not the same thing. Be sure that you’re very specific about this and double check to be sure that you get what you’re asking for.

Also, try to find a printer that is capable of printing with FM (stochastic, staccato, etc.) screening. This is different from AM screening (conventional ie:175, 200 line, etc., etc.), and the level of very fine detail that is possible between FM screening and AM screening is like night and day. For some unknown reason not all printers are using it even though FM screening is far superior to AM screening in almost every way, and it has been around since the 1990s. Go figure...

 

[mitch deoudes]

The great info continues to flow - thanks! Definitely some things to check with our printer - and at the very least, I'll have some big words to throw around if I ever get invited to a printer's party. ;-P

Now that you mention it: One thing we've been finding it difficult to judge is reproduction quality based on received samples of printed photography. As you can see from our example drawings, very few of them are "photo-like", in terms of sharpness of lines & fineness of details, distribution of contrast, the character of gradations, etc. (Obviously - I mean, they're drawings.) Part of me wants to believe, "if a photo looks good on paper, a drawing will too". But a more suspicious part of me thinks they're two relatively different animals.

And the samples we've gotten of printed art tend to be not at all in the style of our examples: comic books, graphic art / ads, children's books. Ours are mostly more like wall art - only we don't want that glossy museum book feel. It sounds like matte coated paper is a reasonable choice, but the process itself is still up in the air. Much food for thought.

 

[turbotom1052]

A super calendered sheet is pretty much the gold standard for reproduction of artistic illustrations . It will come at a higher cost than a matte coated sheet of comparable weight. Spent quite a few years working as a pressroom supervisor for one of the leading museum quality printers in the USA, so am very familiar with what works. The most often sheets requested by clients ,were either from the Mowhawk Superfine line, or from a company called Monadaknok with a sheet called Dulcett. These papers are considered "archival" and are of the correct ph to last a very long time.
With the exception of the 2nd image you linked to, all of the other images could be very faithfully represented by printing them in black and grey duotone. The duotone process will allow for both high saturation where needed, along with a very smooth vignette to below a 5% dot. You would be hard pressed to smoothly vignette down from 100% to below 5% without chatter marks on a coated sheet.

 

[mitch deoudes]

Great stuff, thanks! Our prospective printer mentioned that they could do black + spot color grey. But that we'd have to set it up in our files, rather than having them handle the RGB-CMYK conversion, and provided instructions:

https://printninja.com/printing-res...ides/metallic-ink-and-spot-color-setup-guide/

So much stuff to learn. (Though I don't mind that much. I work in computer graphics, so it's not necessarily beyond me to figure out the computer side of things. It's the physical stuff where helpful netizens like yourself will keep me from shooting my feet off.)

 

[alibryan]

Mohawk Superfine is a pretty nice sheet, for sure, and the Mohawk brand has been around for quite a long time...Mohawk papers also now carries the Strathmore line and I think most notably, the Crane brand. Crane has long been famous for its 100% cotton paper and just as a personal preference, I think it’s the finest uncoated paper ever made. At least for rag stock, anyway.

Another great uncoated sheet is Cougar. It’s a very bright white, super smooth sheet but is also very finicky in regards to drying because of its super smooth surface. The ink just sits on top of the sheet rather than soaking in (a good thing for high quality reproduction) so it can take quite a bit longer to thoroughly dry. Unless of course you’re using a modern UV press, in which case drying is immediate and the issue then becomes moot.

*Matte stock isn’t usually compared to uncoated stock because it’s a coated sheet, although it is in fact the only coated sheet with a surface that truly resembles an uncoated sheet. Depending on your preferences, I think it’s the best of both worlds as far as ink color brightness, yet complete lack of paper background shine.

For very fine offset printing detail, FM screening is unparalleled. It’s basically comprised of randomly patterned 10-20 micron sized 1% dots across the gradation, so there’s virtually no loss of any detail in photos/illustrations. That also means there are no rosette patterns, no image breaks due to the line screening, and no possibility of moirés.

Take care and good luck with your project!

 

[turbotom1052]

Great stuff, thanks! Our prospective printer mentioned that they could do black + spot color grey. But that we'd have to set it up in our files, rather than having them handle the RGB-CMYK conversion, and provided instructions:

https://printninja.com/printing-res...ides/metallic-ink-and-spot-color-setup-guide/

So much stuff to learn. (Though I don't mind that much. I work in computer graphics, so it's not necessarily beyond me to figure out the computer side of things. It's the physical stuff where helpful netizens like yourself will keep me from shooting my feet off.)

My suggestion would be not as a "spot color grey" but as a true duotone. Spot color suggests grey as a stand alone line art color. Duotone would be, for lack of a better description, a 2 color halftone. By running as a duotone you're able to capture a much fuller range of halftone coverage. Duotone is often used in art quality reproductions of old school black and white prints. It also lends itself well to monotone pencil sketches, charcoal reproductions and such. In my opinion well done duotone printed images have more appeal than full 4 color offset printing. Very much in line with the artistic appeal of black and white photography over full color!!!
The key to success would be to find a printer thats fully familiar with this specialized process. The biggest hurdle when it comes to printing really good duotones is that its hard to accurately proof. This will require a bit of experimentation on press to realize the full potential of the process.

 

[mitch deoudes]

Thanks for the continued info! The rabbit hold keeps getting deeper... So does true duotone require a different kind of press? I.e., is it just a matter of how you separate the colors in the input file, and then it can be printed on a 4-color press, or are we talking about a totally different type of output equipment?

I did do some light googling, but didn't immediately find info on presses, just file prep: https://www.bookdesignmadesimple.com/2-color-printing

Some more info from the printer I linked above, who we've been talking to:

As far as two-tone offset printing, that's certainly an option you can do with us, but your files would need to be set up that way; we wouldn't be able to do that conversion for you like we typically do for RGB to CMYK. It would need to be a black + spot color grey. We could also do black and white as a four-color process, which is a bit different from rich black and commonly used in black-and-white photography printing. Or, you could keep the fine details in black and white and do the larger areas in rich black. So, lots of options for that issue!

And from the guy who originally suggested duotone to us:

Almost medium sized shop that has been around for more than a decade probably has a press capable of the job that’s spending time sitting idle—and it should be much less expensive than 4-color offset. though more expensive than a digital run. The challenge, if you go that route, will be finding a prepress tech who has experience building duotones. If they haven’t done it before, you’re going to want to make a few test runs.

As has been noted by you & others, going some esoteric route that ends up with the printer dropping the ball is a concern, as well.

n.b. - we're considering the printers I linked to not only because they seem to know what they're doing but because they'll do small runs, thereby putting offset within our reach in the first place. Our budget isn't large enough to do 500 or 1000 books right off the bat, unless they're extraordinarily cheap. It's a passion project, so we'd rather do ~200 books that come out really well, rather than 1000 that we have to skimp on for budget reasons. (Thus, the desire to go with offset rather than digital.) Then, if it looks like the item is really popular, we'll be in a position to finance a larger second run. If it's not, we can do a second small run, or switch to digital to continue to support the people who want to buy it, and only the lucky folks who got in early will have the top quality version.

 

[turbotom1052]

The thing with offset sheetfed printers these days, as you are finding, is that most of them want to print these images in 4 color black and white. The reason being is that just about everyone these days has a 4 color press, and they like to just start up in the morning with the 4 process colors, and print job after job in 4color. The 4 color process can print black and white images with cmyk, and in the right hands it can look damn good. The problem is as mentioned that unless the pre press, and the pressman are spot on, 4 color black and white images can easily get away from the pressman, and tend to get a cast in the direction of any of the 3 colors that run too heavily, or with too much dot gain.
Sheetfed offset would most definitely be the desired process, and there are some places that can do duotone images really well. The problem is that its a dying art and reserved for a more specialized sort of printer. Speciality printers usually equal $$$, and rightfully so. Any sheetfed offset printer could do it for you ,but the results might wind up being a crapshoot to the discerning eye. As much as I dont like print brokers. I would say that this might be the perfect project to enlist a broker to walk you through this. Or you could pay me a reasonable consulting fee and I could drive down to the city and oversee the entire project while teaching you the finer points!!!

 

[mitch deoudes]

Thanks for the info, and the offer! While I suspect that the numerical value of a "reasonable fee" varies widely, it's occurred to me it would be worth paying someone "in the trade" to sanity check our final plan, before executing. I'll keep you (all of you, for anyone who's interested) in mind. And of course, many thanks for the continued info, and for not wasting energy pooping on my relative amateur state. Very refreshing, for an interwebs interaction.

I don't know if there are anti-solicitation rules on this forum, but if anyone wants to direct message me with specific printers to talk to, I'm all ears. We're not married to our current selection - though we do have a good feeling about them, their friendliness, and their level of competence.