Size of original art?

[dangerdork]

I've started my own deck, and I'm not quite sure yet whether they will be digital or traditional media in their final form. I have a bunch of sketches AND digital files already - and between scanning things to recombine and printing things to trace and color by hand, the images are not quite either traditional OR digital.

I am a couple years at least from completing a deck, but I would like to know from the beginning what sizes publishers are comfortable working with. The guidelines they publish are not that clear, especially on pixel resolution of digital files.

Anyone have any experience with this issue?

[Marie]

Hi:)

I think the publishers prefer something not too big for ease in scanning, if its non-digital media, something around 3 times the size it will be shrunk down to. For digital I am sure whatever is the biggest size you can save them in and you can always reduce later. I wouldn't go any less than 300 dpi and make sure to save in a good format like EPS, PDF or PSD etc., not jpeg.

Speaking only for myself, I have done 50 or so images, traditional media, at 7" x 11.5". It's good in that it will be easy to scan, doesn't take much space for that many paintings and are easy to ship, move, etc., but if I could do it all over again I would probably work much bigger. Sometimes its hard to get good detail and to do what I want when the little person I am painting is no bigger than a barbie doll. They also just don't have the impact of a decent sized painting, and I have always been partial to big canvases.

I Think just about any size is eventually doable as long as it is good quality and the size is consistent with all the cards. I have heard of cards done card size and ones done on huge canvases and they are all done and published. So it's really up to you:)

:)Marie

[dangerdork]

Thanks Marie.

You reminded me about something else I was wondering - Where is the cut off point for fine details on a larger original, if it is going to wind up printed on a card? I'm thinking especially of details in facial expressions - I use sort of a pencils/inks/colors style (e.g. the Coleman-Smith and BOTA decks, and most contemporary comics), and the figure outlines can only be reduced to a certin point before they get lost by reducing size. Do you know if there are any rules of thumb for what gets lost and what doesnt when the size is reduced? Is 600 dpi better than 300 ?

Maybe I'm being too technical. I love the way my images are turning out so far, but I wouldnt want to go to get them published 5 years from now and find out I was doing it wrong all along...

[Marie]

I have no idea about any rules of thumb. What I usually do is scan in my sketches and then reduce them to card size to see how they look and I get a good idea from that.

600 dpi is better, but maybe it's overkill?? I don't know how much of a difference it makes in print quality. I looked around a bit and US Games says they want them in an EPS or TIFF format but doesnt specify dpi and Llewellyn wants 300 dpi, CMYK in Tiff or EPS also. So that's probably close to what most publishers will want.

:) Marie

[dangerdork]

Marie:

Thanks for all the advice, I was going to ask if you had any cards online, then I figured out how to look it up for myself.

I had just seen your deck for the first time earlier this week, it's spectacular work. You are truly a gifted artist, and I am sure I will be spending a lot of time enjoying your tarot images in the future.

Thank you so much again for taking time to share your insights.

[Marie]

Thanks!
Do you have any of yours online?

Marie

[dangerdork]

not yet... I just started the project. I have lots of preliminary sketches (both hand drawn and digital comps) for the Fool and The Magician. I will probably have something worth sharing within the next few days, if you're interested. I would really value your opinion, if you wanted to take a look at the prelim stuff.

[Marie]

yes, I'd love to.

[dangerdork]

OK, I'll try to post something tomorrow.

[HudsonGray]

Remember to keep the proportions for the height & width correct, so when they reduce it down the cards will be the proper size! VERY important.

Reducing by a bit will tighten up the art, but too far & like you said, you loose detail.

I saw origionals of the Ancestral Path tarot, she worked larger than the 8 1/2 x 11" size since they were all oil paintings. I saw a hand done deck that used regular blank typing paper that was reduced down & printed, which turned out pretty good.

[AmounrA]

I would agree with hudson, pick a size and keep to it, if you do any bigger , make sure they can all scale up or down to the same size.

My originals, without border are 7cm x 11cm. When the border is added, they can be made into the correct printing size wanted.

When I scan stuff into the computer I store a copy for storage at real size at 600. jpg. These can easily be converted into quality tiff files.

When sending for viewing perposes I generally stay at 600, but reduce the file size to 4.5-5 cm. This makes them fairly small in size and quick to send....but also still quality to view.

I would also stress the importance of back up......anything finished store on C.D or disk. There is nothing worst than lossing work because you have not backed it up.

[dangerdork]

Decks seem not only to come in different sizes, but different ratios as well. Is there an actual "standard" ratio? 7 x 11? Is that the RWS size? Also, do publishers allow any artists a say about borders? I had just noted on another thread I've seen decks such as Morgan Greer and Templars with NO borders, the art bleeds to the edges all around.

Thanks all for your comments and advice!

[AmounrA]

sorry, had a typing error there.its 17x11 cm.

[juice]

I was looking up something getting printed on coasters once and 2 or 3 web sites of printers said that printing to the edge was a more expensive process. This may not apply to cards but I bet it does. You may need to negotiate or compromise on this point with the publisher.

Jpg is lossy compression and not a good file format for storing valuable originals. If you never plan to make a change, jpg is ok. If sometime you need to make changes, like adding a border or changing border color or label fonts, you will be converting to "tiff" and back into jpg. Each time you go to jpg you create distortion you might have to fix and may not catch. Each time distortions you didn't catch before get magnified.

[dangerdork]

Originally posted by juice
Jpg is lossy compression and not a good file format for storing valuable originals. If you never plan to make a change, jpg is ok. If sometime you need to make changes, like adding a border or changing border color or label fonts, you will be converting to "tiff" and back into jpg. Each time you go to jpg you create distortion you might have to fix and may not catch. Each time distortions you didn't catch before get magnified.

If you plan to have the cards professionally printed, I would recommend NEVER using jpegs at all, unless you save at 100% quality. The compression artifact can really show up on high -end equipment, and forget 4 color process.

I only export to jpegs when I want to post stuff on the web, that's what they were meant for.

If you're working at that level, you should be using Photoshop anyway, or another professional level tool. (I use Painter and Corel PhotoPaint). Paint Shop Pro is also a good option that offers many of the features of more expensive professional programs.

[rota]

If you know anyone in the printing world, buy them lunch, give them a reading, tell them about your project, and pump them for information.
Typically, if you're working on your cards in computer, and intend them for print: work in CMYK and save at not less than 600 dpi.

You'll be saving yourself all kinds of trouble later on...

[JPT]

A fairly standard format for any item to be printed on an offset press is:

1.PPI 300

2. CMYK file (choose a US or European coated process profile) Don't send RGB files unless requested.

3. Do not embed any "working space" profiles from Photoshop or other software.

4. Actual size is always best. In flat art work you will need to scale up from standard card sizes in order not to present production problems later.

Hope this helps!
JPT

[kayne]

Originally posted by JPT
3. Do not embed any "working space" profiles from Photoshop or other software.Hey JPT,
Thanks for the tips. I am not sure what you mean by this? Sorry if it should be obvious...
Thanks! :D

[JPT]

I just dropped in from another thread on this topic.
Re: Original art proportions - As HudsonGray said, mantaining consistency in the proportions of the original art is critical. Acceptance by a publisher will be somewhat easier if they see that you understand the graphic journey from "art to print".

You may be advised to stick to a standard card size as this means the publisher will not have to pay the printer for a special-size set of clicking knives (to punch-cut the cards) thus reducing costs.

Re:Scan size - The point to consider here is PIXEL SIZE/DENSITY. The question is best answered by first knowing the LPI (lines per inch) that the offset printer uses to create the 4 color screens for the press. A general standard (for tarot card quality, which is not as finely made as art books, for instance) is 110 - 150 LPI. The rule of thumb is to scan at 2 X ( measured in DPI -dot per inch) the printer's LPI (lines per inch). This would translate to scanning at 220DPI to 300DPI.

Put simply, the logic is to maintain the pixel size all the way through. Even though it sounds great to scan at 600DPI the pixels will still have be interpolated (fattened) because there are more pixels per inch than the screens for the press can capture. Think of the printer's screens as a fishing net (even though they are CMYK dots on film). When the printer proceeds to make color separations from your art scans their setting will drop out all of those smaller pixels (details) and make a generic decision on what color is predominant within the parameters the color separator set up - based again on how the printer's press is set up. Simplified again - all the extra pixels (above 300DPI) get sifted and regrouped by the color separator. This leaves too much room for the machines in the print process to "interpret" your work, rather than "reproduce" your work, based on how it is set up.
Of course this happens all the way through the process! But the best way to have a positive effect on the final output of your art is to pass the publisher/printer files that are consistent with their production process. ASK and ye shall receive (well maybe) otherwise ask again!

JPT

[JPT]

Hey Kayne,
Sorry for the PShop jargon! But that is a very very common mistake that happens with only one missed click when saving files and the effects are totally frustrating for a printer and you!

If you have someone scan and save your files pls specify that they save the files "with no embedded color profile". That profile is something that is used to coordinate color monitors to specific printer outputs (usually in house). This means if you own the printer then you use a "densitometer" to set the computer monitor to see the "color gamut" of what the printer can produce. But......... this is a headache for offset printing because they will open your file and see a very different "color gamut" on their monitors because they are coordinated with "their" proofing machines and presses. Its a bit much to swallow but it is a much appreciated improvement from 10 years ago when the concept of any "color standard" was only a future myth.

JPT

[Page]

CTP=Computer to plate
This is done via PDF but you have to make sure that you run a PDF check to make sure that the fonts are embeded, dpi, etc. PitStop is a recommended PDF checker.

Most up to date printers do CTP this saves a lot of time and you don't need to run out a set of films which you would do for standard printing.
This is also works out cheaper as this cuts the time for the printers to set up the machines to print. Most of all it's quick!

Maud

[allibee]

yes Maud, CPT is THE most wonderous thing.
If you can be seen to be providing the publishers with cost effective solutions, then you are one step nearer to acceptance than the person that doesn't.

[RiccardoLS]

Hi,

speaking for LoScarabeo we ask for images of this ratio:
81 x 135 mm.
If You have images of a different ratio, it may be adjusted by appropriate graphics on the card layout.
We usually (always) do the scan ourselves. The quality of the scan is really important, even more than the resolution.
Any graphical element (like a frame or anything) should be kept as a separate image.
We than save images as CYMK TIF images at 300 dpi. More than 300 dpi is useless unless the originals were smaller than the printed cards. That's because the printing process uses up to 300 dpi for CMYK images. Greyscale images could be saved as 600 dpi and bitmap as 1200 dpi.
You must consider that the images will be printed on a 60 x 109 measures (usually), so the actual resolution will be larger than 300 dpi.
TIF images are saved without any compression (nor even the LWZ). We use the Euroscale Coated color profile, but if You are using a different profile You may wish to add the profile to the image. Any competent graphic may then use it.

The images are then placed into a Quark X-press document, where all names and graphical elements are added. The final document is then sent as a CTP (Computer to plate). You don't need to send the CTP as a pdf. The printer will usually handle that, and he will make use of applications like Pit Stop.
That's also because You will have to check colors and text before saying ok for printing and there is ALWAYS something to change or adjust, so a PDF file is not advisable. (if You want to use a Pdf anyway, save it at a 1200 dpi resolution, with Distiller).

Be sure to include any and every font used (both on X-press, Freehand and photoshop). Be sure You have both print and screen fonts or a good truetype font. Most important, remember that Your printer will work on a Mac, so don't use PC fonts.
Save every color as CMYK.

If You're going to use a monochromatic backside, use a greyscale image, and then apply a PANTONE color.
Most important, have the side of Your card be of a full colors for at least 1.5 mm wide. Otherwise there may be problem when the card are cutted. If you plan to use writings very fine in size, make sure they are in a color 100% either Cyan, magenta, Yellow or Black, to avoid any registry problems.

I've been quite technicals, but thatìs are most of the trick of the trade :)
As an artist your only concern would be to check the ratio of the originals :) And be prepared. Something it's one way on the originals will look differently in print... for the good or the bad :)

Riccardo

[RiccardoLS]

Originally posted by Maud
CTP=Computer to plate

This is also works out cheaper as this cuts the time for the printers to set up the machines to print. Most of all it's quick!

Maud

Most of all, it's easy (and unexpensive) to make changes and corrections. :)

Riccardo

[allibee]

Originally posted by RiccardoLS
Most important, have the side of Your card be of a full colors for at least 1.5 mm wide. Otherwise there may be problem when the card are cutted.

If this is all very new to you and you are a beginner, maybe you have some books or have downloaded some net info, what Riccardo is talking about here is 'bleed'.
There are so many technical terms that don't get explained too well even in books, but here is a really good example of what the term Bleed means.

allibee

[Page]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RiccardoLS
[B]Hi,
You don't need to send the CTP as a pdf. The printer will usually handle that, and he will make use of applications like Pit Stop.

Yes that’s right!

As you can just send a Quark file or what ever programs your printers accepts and the printers will sort it out.

Most printers work the same way but may have different specs and cut out the 2nd stage of sending proofs.

There are also other pdf software’s which can correct a pdf but you will find that most Printers still work with films or do both + have both mac’s & PC’s

I think it’s best to check all your work before sending of to the printers as the do charge for making corrections, scans, delays and will not be responsible if you have checked the proofs that are run out and there is an error like font’s not embedded.

I’ve worked with a number of printers & publishers and they are always busy but make time for you,even if it's to answer thing which my seem stupid. This was a blessing for me when I joined the print world as I didn’t even know what the “K” was in CMYK, wet proofs, 8 colour printing etc.

The print industry moves sooooooooo fast that I’m sure when it comes to the last stages of my deck that there will be some kind of new printing.

That’s enough Printers jargon, it's enough to put anyone off designing if they had to think about printers and copyright.

To be honest all you need to know is what your printer requires otherwise you'll be worring yourself stupid. Even when I worked in Printing & Published I had to do a course on print buying & production management at The London School of Printing and I found out that when I mentioned thing we done on the course to those at work they hadn't a clue + I didn't find any text books on the subject that was in layman's terms (things made simple)

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by allibee There are so many technical terms that don't get explained too well even in books.

That's so true, the only way that I learnt was from hands on experience and had over 10 printers to work with.

Riccardo you must of seen such good decks while working. Have you thought of doing your own deck?

[Marie]

Hi Riccardo:)

I wonder if during this whole process the artist gets to check on how the colors are coming along and make any comments or suggestions? And then is there the possibility of making adjustments?

Thanks:)
Marie

[RiccardoLS]

It depends on where the artist lives :)
Usually it's difficult he can have a look at cromalines or similar things.
But I think it is beter if I take the question from a larger angle.

The way the art is, from the original to the printed card, changes, but it's not because of the Publisher decision. It's jst because of the style and of the tecniques used.

First, one prints in 4 colours, while one paints in a larger number of hues. That makes a difference. Card quality also reflect lights ina very different manner (not to talk of the way the paper absors ink).
Brilliant colors, done with some kind of paint gets dulled in printing (no way out of that). Sometimes print takes out some defect of the artist, and sometimes it hides it to the eye.
All of this changes cannot be adjusted. (maybe with a lot of work, and a lot of time, impossible to give).
So the artist, or the artistic director, just accepts what the end results is going to be. With some experience many artists already know what works and what works not for printing before doing it.

Then there is the amount of details the art contains. The reason You do the originals in a larger size is that when you reduce the illustration, most of the defects and of the mistakes disappear. On the other side if You just think in the larger size you may add too many small details. For instance it requires care to make eyes "barely open" as they may seem just "closed" on a smaller size. Also, apart form digitally or phisically correcting the image here is nothing You can adjust.

What is most important, however, much more than anything else, is the graphic layout that's going to surround the image. When You look at a card, the actual art is just a part of it. A focal part, of course.
Try to take the same image and place it inside different borders, with a different text font... and you will have the impression of looking at something totally different. What it's important to remember is that the graphical parts usually doesn't change along the whole deck. That way if you have an art which is not omogenous you risk that some cards are perfect and athers terrible.
Usually the artists gets to say something on the graphic layout. Many are just curious and hope for the best. Others are quite vocal.
For instance we are now deciding the graphic layout that will go with the incoming Vampire deck. We want it to be very modern and not at all baroque. The two possibilities are both with a black border. One is with a broad ,blood red, band on the left side, without any writings but for stylized icons. The other has two metallic white bars crossing to create the hint of a cross motive.
The artist seem to prefer the "White" idea, but the final decision will be taken by the artistic director.

I hope this answer your question. It seemed to em it was a broader question regarding the relation between the Artist and the Publisher. Just remember I'm speaking for Lo Scarabeo only and I know other Publishers works very differently in many ways.

Best,

Riccardo

[Marie]

Thanks Riccardo for answering my questions so completely and then some!
I am looking over some of the Lo Scarabeo decks I have and the colors look very bright and sharp and it seems like all the detail is intact. How do you think they compare to the original artworks? Do they look like them or more of an interpretation of them?
Someone recently told me Lo Scarabeo had an excellent reputation as a fine art publisher in Europe. Being in the US I'm not that familiar with what is published over there, so forgive me if my questions are silly! I am trying very hard to educate myself in this area as of late.

Thanks again,
Marie

[RiccardoLS]

Originally posted by Maud

Riccardo you must of seen such good decks while working. Have you thought of doing your own deck? [/B]

I did :)
But not as an artist.

Riccardo

[RiccardoLS]

Originally posted by Marie
I am looking over some of the Lo Scarabeo decks I have and the colors look very bright and sharp and it seems like all the detail is intact. How do you think they compare to the original artworks? Do they look like them or more of an interpretation of them?
It depends. For instance the Fey Tarot lost a great deal (sigh) from the originals. While for the Tarot of the New Vision (incoming) every and any image was adjusted on computer, and the result is incredibly better.
It depends from deck to deck... Overall, I think that usually LS gives much more attention to print than most other Publishers.
But it just mean we give less attention to other things (like spelling :).

Someone recently told me Lo Scarabeo had an excellent reputation as a fine art publisher in Europe. Being in the US I'm not that familiar with what is published over there, so forgive me if my questions are silly! I am trying very hard to educate myself in this area as of late.

I don't think anyone know about Lo Scarabeo outside Italy, except for Tarot. In Italy however Lo Scarabeo has a bit of renown in the comic book industry. They did quite a few art books on the major artists and charachters of the Italian scene. They also got a few awards :)

(I got the feeling we are getting out of topic. Maybe if You are interested in more about LS, we should start a new thread. It would be interesting to try to get on the Forum also Barbara Moore from Llewellyn and maybe someone from AGM or USG, to talk about the different approaches toward Tarot decks)

Riccardo

[Kyrielle]

Riccardo --

How did the Fey Tarot art lose a lot from the originals? In terms of color, or detail, or what? I am a big fan of the deck, and to me there's a lot still there, but I was curious as to what was different about the original artwork.

-- Kyrielle

[RiccardoLS]

I really don't know how to explain. :(
If I find time I will try to put online some scans of the original art, and see if it's possible to show the difference.

Riccardo