Converting new CMYK logo to RGB for web, poor results

I have a new logo using 4 cmyk colors. (we print a lot and always print cmyk, not spot/Pantone). When I convert to RGB, especially the blue and somewhat the green-- lose vibrancy. The blue is pure cyan, 100-0-0-0. The left image is a screen grab of cmyk and right is rgb. You often lose vibrancy going from RGB to CMYK, which is not surprising considering the limitations of CMYK. But why an issue going the reverse? Same result in photoshop & illustrator.
What is the best way to create an RGB version of a CMYK or Pantone logo that is as consistent on the web as possible? This logo needs to be colorful and saturated, so the blue looking dull is more serious. Thanks.

Use document >> color mode >> RGB. You will then have much more vibrancy when tweaking RGB colors, and be designing in a space that matches your output.
If you have not color calibrated your monitor do that first. I would also hold up a printed piece to the monitor and match your RGB document to that. That will take away any monitor color shift to press.
When you are done write down the RGB numbers, not the CMYK numbers, and use the RGB numbers for future RGB doucuments. I got 0, 155, 230 for my monitor calibration North AmericanGP2.

Similar Messages

  • Do duotones have to be converted to CMYK prior to PDF for publication?

    Hi, we have a series of duotone images for publication, created in Photoshop CS4.
    The duotones are saved as EPS files, imported into InDesign and exported as PDF files.
    We thought that would have been fine, but sight-unseen the printer is telling us he doesn't even know what duotones are (!) and that those duotones will have to be converted to CMYK and then exported again as PDF files.
    Does this sound right? Do we have to do convert every image, or else it won't print?
    It seemed to us that the duotone "mode" was designed for publication of b&w images, to increase tonality in the print. We figured that if they were saved as duotones and exported to PDF, that the PDF file would be sufficient. So, what then is the point of converting duotones if the printer is then going to turn around and say, nope, can't do it that way?
    I checked instructional tutorials and Adobe "help," but can't find the answer.
    Help would be greatly appreciated.
    Thank you, Kelli & Dave
    (*cross-posted at the PhotoShop forum.)

    If you make use of spot colors n your duotones and your printer only accepts CMYK files some action may be needed somewhere.
    Easiest approach: convert to CMYK using Acrobat Pro (Convert colors feature) or specialized Acrobat plug-ins/tools like pdfToolbox 4 from callas software.
    Olaf
    callas software

  • SRGB or RGB for web?

    I know when i convert my images to be uploaded for my clients for their online gallery- they should be converted to sRGB. I just noticed at the bottom of my camera RAW 4.1 there is an option to switch it right there where it gives the information -( with the bit and ppi number)
    -should i swith it to sRGB here before editing in CS3?
    -should i switch my images to 300 ppi and 16 bit as well?
    thanks in advance...

    >-should i swith it to sRGB here before editing in CS3?
    Sure. If you don't need a different version of your image, this will save you the conversion step. (I'm assuming your working space is also sRGB?). However, if you print your images yourself or use a pro lab that handles other profiles, you may want to rethink that.
    >-should i switch my images to 300 ppi and 16 bit as well?
    It all depends on the final intended use of your images. If you normally work with 16 bits images and need 300 dpi for printing, by all means do the conversion right there in ACR.

  • How do you convert to cmyk in aperture 3 for printing business cards?

    I'm wanting to make my own business cards and post cards online.  The printing companies want cmyk files.  How do I convert my photo files and pages files to cmyk?  I do not use Photoshop, only Aperture 3.5.1.
    Please keep it simple.  I'm an old dinosaur and could be your next tank of gas!
    Thanks

    You will need some External Photo editor, and you can get to to invoke from with Aperture.  For the price and function, I can recommend GraphicConverter.  Check it out in the Mac App Store for $39.95.
    Aperture will create a new master to send to GC, and in GC you click on Picture/Mode and choose CMYK.  Then simply click Save, and it will now be saved in the Aperture Library as CMYK.
    Aperture can archive the CMYK, but not convert it.
    Ernie

  • Logo outline transparent for web

    I have created a logo. I did it with black fill and white lines. This works well for a white background, like in print; but for the web the white needs to be transparent so the background colors show through and where lines cross you can see the background.
    I have tried using no-fill, but that makes the lines not delineated, rather than transparent. There are small bits with lines cross one another and to make their relationship clear I put in small white lines, which work well with a white background, but not for the web.
    I'll attach a close up of the issue. I've offset the small line bits so you can see I'm trying to make one line cross another and where they cross have a clear line on either side of the crossing line.

    KaCe,
    As I (mis)understand it, you can:
    1) Create both black paths with the Stroke Weight that gives the right widths, with the one that crosses over the other on top;
    2) Select the top path and Object>Path>Offset Path by an amount equalling the visible gaps in the bottom path;
    3) Select both the offset top path and the bottom path and in the Transparency palette flyout>Make Opacity Mask (Clip and Invert mask both unticked).
    hat should give you a gap on either side of the top path.

  • Error converting CFML arguments to Java classes for web service invocation.

    Hello all.
    I am working on writting a small application that will use a web service that is provided by our IVR (Angel.com). I am able to login, however when I attempt to do anything with complex objects, I get the error stated in the title.
    It seems to be having a problem with the array, because when I remove it, or turn it into a simple string, i get errors about the function not being found. I am fairly new to web services, and especially dealing with complex data types, so any help would be much appreciated.
    You can see my testing page at
    http://webservices.fpitesters.com/AngelCalls.cfm
    The WSDL I am using can be found at
    http://www.angel.com/outbound/wsdl/OutboundCallService.wsdl
    Here is sample code that does what I want it to do in Java / Apache Axis
    http://www.socialtext.net/ivrwiki/index.cgi?java_sample_code
    Here is a description of the function I am having problems with
    http://www.socialtext.net/ivrwiki/index.cgi?placecall
    And attached is my code.
         <cfset email = "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx">
         <cfset pin = "xxxxxxxxxxxx">
         <cfinvoke webservice="http://www.angel.com/outbound/wsdl/OutboundCallService.wsdl" method="login" returnvariable="login">
              <cfinvokeargument name="email" value="#email#"/>
              <cfinvokeargument name="pin" value="#pin#"/>
         </cfinvoke>
         <cfdump var="#login#">
         <cfset Token = login.getToken()>
         <cfdump var="#token#">
         <cfset CallItem.maxWaitTime = 100>
         <cfset CallItem.phoneNumbers[1] = "7632344306">
         <cfset CallItem.siteNumber = 100041>
         <cfinvoke webservice="http://www.angel.com/outbound/wsdl/OutboundCallService.wsdl" method="placeCall" returnvariable="call">
              <cfinvokeargument name="Token" value="#Token#"/>
              <cfinvokeargument name="CallItem" value="#CallItem#"/>
         </cfinvoke>
         <cfdump var="#call#">

    If you are not initializing phoneNumbers as an array before setting
    <cfset CallItem.phoneNumbers[1] = "7632344306">
    it will be passed as a struct with a key of 1.  This could cause your argument conversion error.
    So:
    <cfset CallItem.maxWaitTime = 100>
    <cfset CallItem.phoneNumbers[1] = "7632344306">
    <cfset CallItem.siteNumber = 100041>
    Will result in
    struct
    MAXWAITTIME
    100
    PHONENUMBERS
    struct
    1
    7632344306
    SITENUMBER
    100041
    <cfset CallItem = StructNew() > <!--- For Good Measure --->
    <cfset CallItem.maxWaitTime = 100 >
    <cfset CallItem.phoneNumbers = arrayNew(1) /> <!--- Required --->
    <cfset CallItem.phoneNumbers[1] = "7632344306">
    <cfset CallItem.siteNumber = 100041>
    Will result in
    struct
    MAXWAITTIME
    100
    PHONENUMBERS
    array
    1
    7632344306
    SITENUMBER
    100041
    - Jason Morgan

  • Convert FCE HD project into Flash for web?

    I would like to use FCE HD to edit/create some footage and then convert it to Flash so anyone on any platform can view it on the web. Is this possible?

    As an update, I have located the export->'Item Description' feature which exports a plain text description of the DVD project.
    I changed the entry:
    <key>DVDStandardVersion</key>
    <string>HD</string>
    To
    <key>DVDStandardVersion</key>
    <string>SD</string>
    .. now I can open this file with DVD Studio Pro, and I have something similar to my project, but in SD. (I expect some things may be broken by the SD/HD conversion, but those should be quickly ironed out.)
    Message was edited by: fredrickdakine

  • What's New in Adobe Creative Cloud for Web Pros | Creative Cloud for Web | Adobe TV

    Introducing all of the tools you need to create a more beautiful, modern web — accessible now in Creative Cloud.
    http://adobe.ly/11O2G2N

    I notice your tools are very familiar with Google Chrome, which is still running on Webkit. Is anything going to change once Chrome moves to Blink? Specially on Edge Reflow, which you mention runs Webkit. And...what about supporting other browsers (coff, Firefox)?

  • RGB Colours change when saving for Web

    I'm saving work in RGB for Web, but the colours come out muted when saving through "Save for Web" also when saving as normal. Does anyone know why this happens? Normally this occurs through RGB to CMYK conversion, but can't figure out why it's happening, they look fine on screen before saving, but look all muted when saved.
    Cheers

    Two things: you could be working in Adobe RGB and saving directly to JPG, without converting to sRGB first. When the sRGB profile is assumed (Windows), or your narrow-gamut display profile is assumed (Mac), you get a color shift. So make sure you converting to sRGB as or before you save the JPG. Also, if you're on a Mac, then the display profile is assumed or assigned to images from the web. If you're using a laptop, the display gamut is much narrower than even sRGB, so you will see a color shift. The way around this is to use a browser capable of assigning sRGB to untagged images (like Firefox with color management enabled).
    You can always embed sRGB profiles in your images, which would be fine for portfolio pieces, but impractical for smaller images. Embedding a color profile will ensure that Safari displays the images correctly.
    Read here for a start:
    http://www.gballard.net/psd/saveforwebshift.html

  • Export PNG in CMYK vs. RGB. Changing colors.

    Short version: Using Illustrator CC. I correctly exported a PNG logo in RGB (sent to client), but the new PNG logo looks much different than the old PNG logo that was exported incorrectly in CMYK (sent to client long ago).
    Client wants to know why the NEW PNG logo looks so different than the EPS logo and the OLD PNG logo (all starting with the same Pantone color).
    Longer version:
    I recently sent logos to my client in different formats.
    ai, eps, eps CMYK, pdf, and png
    Prior to creating the PNG version in Illustrator CC,
    I changed Illustrator's color mode to RGB, then converted my Pantone colors to RGB (specific values per the Pantone book), then exported as PNG.
    This created a much different blue than the CMYK eps version.
    Someone else on the client side is working with my files and questioning why the blues look so different. The Pantone eps vs. the RGB version.
    Problem:
    In the past, the PNGs had been created incorrectly--They had been exported in CMYK mode without converting anything to RGB and they matched much closer to the EPS version.
    Now they are asking why there is such a big difference.
    I did the process correctly, I'm not sure how to answer this. Why do they look so different?

    So if I just leave the Document Color Mode as CMYK, leaving with the logo set in it's specific Pantone colors, and then Export/PNG, that will covert my CMYK colors to RGB for me. Seems almost too easy. Just go File/Export/PNG, but okay.
    And while that may give me a better perceptual match, here's the other side of the issue.
    They've given me and their web company specific RGB values for their logo. These are based on the Pantone book, and likely different than the conversion Illustrator will do.
    The idea being, they want the website and logo to be the exact same blue. And they are based on the values they gave, but they look different than the original Pantone. Brighter and more vibrant. I'm dealing with another member of the client team, trying to use Illustrator on her end for smaller tasks, and she wants to know why the rgb PNG logo (which I entered in manual values for based on the Pantone book), is so different than the Pantone eps file. In the past, when I just exported as a straight PNG without tinkering, the perceptual match was there. Now it isn't. How can I explain this?

  • Looking for a better solution to the "Save for web" color shift issue

    Ok, everyone who has fussed much with photoshop and "Save For Web" knows about the color shift issue. If you want your colors to look right after you "save for web", you have to work in the sRGB colorspace, and have Proof Colors checked (soft proofing on) and the proof color setup set to Monitor RGB, otherwise what you get looks terrible when displayed in a browser.
    But of course if you are editing for print, this is exactly what you DON'T want to do. Well, I work in both. In fact, often the same images, and I want them to appear as close as reasonably possible in both print and web formats, and without a lot of fussing on my part. And I'm pickiest about the print mode, since I have the most control there, so that's the way I want to edit by default.
    Nothing new here.
    Now comes the interesting part (in my mind, anyway). Obviously there is a known remapping -- because PhotoShop DOES it when you select Proof Colors. So the inverse mapping must also be known (with some gamut issues, but I'm not concerned with those, because, after all, I'm VIEWING it on a monitor anyway!). What I want is a plug-in that automatically applies that inverse mapping so that, when I do a Save For Web, I end up with the colors I've been viewing all the time when setting the shot up in print mode. Then, too, I don't have to worry about what mode I'm in when I'm editing -- it just fixes it when doing a save-for-web.
    Again, I want to edit in my normal print mode (typically ProPhoto colorspace, and with soft-proofing off or set to the printer/medium combination I expect to use), then do a single operation (might be a multi-step action) to "screw up" my colors so that when I then do a "Save-For-Web", the resulting image, when viewed on the average color-stupid browser, looks like the image I've been seeing in Photoshop.
    Anyone know of such a beast?   I would gladly pay for a plug-in that really works and fixes the problem.
    And if you have other solutions, I'm interested, but the absolute requirement is that it I do one single edit pass for my colors for both print and web use, and I get what I see on the screen in PS on both the prints and on the web display (i.e., working in sRGB/Monitor RGB mode all the time won't cut it). And PREFERABLY, let me do all my editing work in the ProPhoto (or at least AdobeRGB) colorspace so I have a gamut closer to what the printer can do.
    Anyone got a decent solution for this?

    Chris
    I spent all day Googling and doing side by side comparisons of my old and new systems.
    My display is a Dell U2410. It has several presets, including sRGB and Adobe RGB. I've been using sRGB.
    On my OLD system, (Win XP, PsCS2, DwCS4) there seems to be no distinction between color managed and non color managed apps, even on this wide gamut display. I could capture (digital camera) in Adobe RGB, open and edit in PsCS2, save as .psd, convert to CMYK for print, or convert to sRGB for SFW. All images looked identical and they printed and displayed perfectly. I thought this was normal, and seemed logical. This also seems to be the source of my incorrect assumptions. I was trying to get my new machine to behave like my old one.
    So I get this new machine (Windows 7, PsCS5, DwCS5) and now (still in sRGB display mode) all color managed apps appear de-saturated. Non color managed apps are OK. If I switch the display to Adobe RGB, color managed apps are OK, but non color managed apps are way too saturated. From my investigation, I believe this is normal behavior on a wide gamut display. I've tried changing the Control Panel > Display > Screen Resolution > Advanced settings > Color Management options, but to no avail. Either I'm missing something, or Windows 7 is doing color management differently.
    It seems my only option now is to use Adobe RGB display setting for Ps, etc. and switch to sRGB for Dw and non color managed apps. Or, have 2 separate files for print and web. I've Googled 'til my eyes are numb and still not sure I'm getting this. Any enlightenment would be greatly appreciated.
    Finally, I don't see an edit function here, so I can't remove my previous incorrect reply. Moderator, please feel free to do so.
    Thanks

  • A different take on the "Save For Web" color shift issue...

    Ok, everyone who has fussed much with photoshop and "Save For Web" knows about the color shift issue. If you want your colors to look right after you "save for web", you have to work in the sRGB colorspace, and have Proof Colors checked (soft proofing on) and the proof color setup set to Monitor RGB, otherwise what you get looks terrible when displayed in a browser.
    But of course if you are editing for print, this is exactly what you DON'T want to do. Well, I work in both. In fact, often the same images, and I want them to appear as close as reasonably possible in both print and web formats, and without a lot of fussing on my part. And I'm pickiest about the print mode, since I have the most control there, so that's the way I want to edit by default.
    Nothing new here.
    Now comes the interesting part (in my mind, anyway). Obviously there is a known remapping -- because PhotoShop DOES it when you select Proof Colors. So the inverse mapping must also be known (with some gamut issues, but I'm not concerned with those, because, after all, I'm VIEWING it on a monitor anyway!). What I want is a plug-in that automatically applies that inverse mapping so that, when I do a Save For Web, I end up with the colors I've been viewing all the time when setting the shot up in print mode. Then, too, I don't have to worry about what mode I'm in when I'm editing -- it just fixes it when doing a save-for-web.
    Again, I want to edit in my normal print mode (typically ProPhoto colorspace, and with soft-proofing off or set to the printer/medium combination I expect to use), then do a single operation (might be a multi-step action) to "screw up" my colors so that when I then do a "Save-For-Web", the resulting image, when viewed on the average color-stupid browser, looks like the image I've been seeing in Photoshop.
    Anyone know of such a beast?   I would gladly pay for a plug-in that really works and fixes the problem.
    And if you have other solutions, I'm interested, but the absolute requirement is that it I do one single edit pass for my colors for both print and web use, and I get what I see on the screen in PS on both the prints and on the web display (i.e., working in sRGB/Monitor RGB mode all the time won't cut it). And PREFERABLY, let me do all my editing work in the ProPhoto (or at least AdobeRGB) colorspace so I have a gamut closer to what the printer can do.
    Anyone got a decent solution for this?

    Sorry, I think I'm being unclear.  This has nothing to do with individual monitor profiles.  In Proof Setup, "Monitor RGB" amounts to turning off ALL color management, and simply letting the monitor do what it will.  It is what the vast majority of web browsers do (even if the operating system provides color management, the browsers don't take advantage of it), so that is what you need to consider for images that will be viewed on a web browser.  If you convert your image to sRGB,  select Monitor RGB in Proof Set up, and turn on Proof Colors, you will see the image as it would appear on a web browser (after you save it as a jpg or use "Save For Web/Devices" to save it as a jpg).   Since almost everyone is running different uncalibrated monitors, there will be lots of variation in how it will look to them, so precise control of the color is unimportant.
    That said, I would expect the color on a calibrated monitor (such as the one I use when editing) to be reasonably close to the colors I am seeing while editing in PS.  To the extent a monitor deviates from "calibrated", those colors will vary, but a good monitor should show good colors.   Unfortunately, this is NOT the case, as my previous post shows.  The colors produced by the steps above are oversaturated and significantly shifted in hue.  There is, to my mind, anyway, no reason for this.  Adobe clearly knows what the mapping is between the colors as it displays them in PS and the un-controlled "Monitor RGB" -- that is, it is the color map they are using during normal editing display.  If they were to reverse-apply that map prior to saving it as a jpg, then the image would appear on a browser on that same (presumably calibrated) monitor very similar to what you set up when editing.  Anyone else viewing the image on a web browser with a calibrated monitor would also see good colors.  To the extent other viewers' monitors are out of calibration, their colors will suck, but there's nothing you can do about that.
    I guess in some sense I AM "asking for a Color-Mamangement-solution for a "non-Color-Management-situation", but specifically I'm asking for PS Color Management to do the best it can for non-Color-Managed situations that we all face every day.
    Does that make more sense?

  • Why do my images appear washed out when I use Save for Web?

    Q: The color/brightness/tone of my image changes when I use
    Save for Web. Why?
    A: Photoshop is a color-managed application. The Web is not. Normally, when you view an image in
    Save for Web or
    ImageReady you are viewing it without color management and see it how it will appear when uploaded to the Web.
    To minimize changes, Convert your image to sRGB (i.e from
    Edit menu choose
    Convert to Profile )before using
    Save for Web. You should also make sure that
    Save for Web has been configured so that images are displayed using the document color profile (see attached screenshot for guidance).
    You should also ensure that your monitor properly calibrated and the gamma is set to 2.2.

    Same here. Didn't get any good New Years Eve photos indoors.

  • Loss of saturation in Save for Web

    Hi,
    Objects that I export as PNG24 files using Illustrator's "Save for Web" feature result in files that a considerably less saturated than they appear in the Illustrator file (I'm working in RGB).
    What's up? Is there a quick/easy way to make sure the raster files look just as saturated at the Illustrator objects?
    Thanks!

    calibrate and profile your monitor to the Web standard 2.2 gamma, not the Apple default of 1.8.
    create your Web artwork in the sRGB color space (not Adobe RGB)
    Save for Web.
    You may still see some color shift when you save the image with no profile, but the above steps should minimize it.

  • Recording Save for Web in an Action still doesn't work properly in Photoshop CS6 13.0.1

    There is still an issue with making new actions that include saving for web. While recording the action, save for web functions as it should. But once the action is played, regardless of the original format the saved image should be, it gives it an html filename extension. This can be extremely frustating when you have an action that saves over a hundred images from a single action.
    I have seen posts in Adobe forums from many people regarding this very irritating bug, including posts from Adobe employees acknowledging the bug. This was present in the Beta, the initial release, and in this 13.0.1 update. No fix.
    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/ps_cs6_actions_recorded_action_expor ts_html_instead_of_jpg
    The employee acknowledged this bug THREE months ago (as of this post), yet all things considered, this doesn't seem like something that would take three months to fix!
    I have spoken about this bug with a friend that is a computer programmer. Considering that the action is saving the file correctly, and it's only the name that is not saving properly indicates that this is a superficial error, and not an issue that would require rewriting the code completely. Also consider that this WAS functioning properly in CS5, and that this is a very easily reproducible bug. Adobe should have plenty of information required to correct the issue. I understand that this fix may be more or less difficult to do than what I am suggesting, but it should have been fixed by now.
    I don't understand this mentality. Please Adobe... Put CS7 down for a little while, and fix what needs to be fixed in CS6. People (myself included) have paid A LOT of money for your products, it's not unreasonable to expect them to work properly. Bugs happen, it's understandable, but it's not unrealistic to expect a fix for them when the software is as expensive as it is. Is there actually any plan to correct this issue?

    See also:  http://forums.adobe.com/message/4662367#4662367
    -Noel

Maybe you are looking for