Why .eps?

Why .eps?
Can anyone explain all these questions?:
I'm working with postproduction (television), and always working in rgb-color (lots of logos). And I'm wondering why, when I open an illustrator .eps file in Photoshop the colors are chanting, and when I open an ai, the look fine. Why does Photoshop cs2 handle my .ai files like they were pdf files? Are they? Why do people use .eps files? I want to get rid of them, but if they have a reason, I forgive the format. Once, I remember, it was the format for quark and the old old printer at our school. Is the format still fore the printing house?
Yours truly,
Chris
Sorry my English

EPS. Encapsulated PostScript.
The operative word is Encapsulated.
The purpose of EPS is to provide a "package" which can contain (encapsulate) PostScript data which a PostScript printer can understand, but which a program which may need to include the content may
not understand. The importing program doesn't have to understand the content of the EPS "locked box." It can simply pass it on to the printer.
Example: Microsoft Word is not considered "a PostScript program." But it can import and place on the page an EPS file. The EPS file contains a low-res raster representation of the content of the EPS file so the Word user can have a (rough) visual idea of the content of the file while he is positioning it in his Word document. It looks lousy on-screen, but he can put it on the page and scale it, rotate it, etc. But it's otherwise a "locked box" as far as Word is concerned. Word can't "break into" the box to manipulate the vector or raster native elements it contains.
If the Word user prints the page to a non-PostScript printer, that printer won't understand the contents of the "locked box" either. It will just print the screen pixels of the low res preview.
But if the Word user prints the page to a PostScript printer (a printer with a PostScript "brain"--a PostScript interpreter), the fact that the PostScript code is encapsulated means that Word can just pass the package that it doesn't really understand on to the printer, along with the Word-native elements on the page. The PostScript printer knows how to read the encapsulated data contained in the EPS, and can render the contents in their full resolution and/or resolution-independent vector glory.
Quark XPress is considered "a PostScript program." That is, when it prints, it can translate the XPress-native objects on the page into PostScript code. But that doesn't mean it can understand object data that is native to some
other PostScript program (Illustrator, for example). So again, that other program exports its artwork as an EPS "locked box" or "package". Just as before, the EPS contains a low-res raster representation of the real contents, just to give the XPress user something to see when positioning the EPS container on the page amid the various XPress-native objects.
So the Xpress user prints the page to a PostScript printer. XPress knows how to translate
its objects into PostScript code that the printer can understand, but it still doesn't understand the Illustrator-native objects contained in the EPS. So XPress just passes that EPS along to the printer as a package. The printer's PostScript brain interprets the PostScript code written out by XPress
and interprets the PostScript code which Illustrator wrote into the the encapsulated package.
Now all that is, as you say, somewhat old-world nowadays. The reason is because Adobe:
(1) Created PDF, which is
kind of like PostSript. Think of it as PostScript that is already "halfway interpreted" so it can be printed on both PostScript and non-PostScript devices.
(2) Enabled Illustrator and other Adobe apps to export PDF as well as EPS.
(3) Enabled all the Adobe print-graphics apps to import each other's PDF files as spot-graphics. For example, you can place a PDF generated by Illustrator into InDesign. This allows more interactivity between the imported PDF content and the native objects created in the importing Adobe app. So, for example, you can save a logo created in Illustrator, or a vignetted image created in Photoshop; and place them in InDesign. InDesign can then apply a soft-edged drop shadow to the imported PDF.
Non-Adobe apps have been having to play catch-up in this ability to deal with PDF content as spot graphics (partial content of a page). I'm not sure how far XPress has come in this regard, because I haven't been upgrading my copy of XPress since InDesign was introduced. So for cross-app workflows which involve cross-vendor applications (not just XPress), older solutions like EPS are still more important. But in an all-Adobe print graphics workflow, PDF can pretty much obviate the need for EPS.
When you save an Illustrator file with the option turned on for "PDF Compatibility", that means that the Illustrator file also contains a full duplicate of the content in PDF format. When that "Illustrator" file is placed in InDesign, InDesign actually imports the PDF version, not the native Illustrator version.
When you save a PDF file from Illustrator with the option turned on for "Maintain Illustrator Editability"; again, two full versions of the content are saved. If you later re-open that "PDF" in Illustrator, Illustrator actually reads back in the native Illustrator version, not the PDF version (so, for example, a Blend is still a Blend).
If you save the PDF from Illustrator with the Maintain Illustrator Editability option turned off, Illustrator just saves the PDF version. Illustrator can still re-open the PDF and tear it apart, but the objects will be "more basic" objects. Blends, for example will be stacks of separate paths.
So the bottom line is, EPS is much less important these days for a print-graphics workflow if you are using all Adobe apps. But it can still be important if the workflow involves non-Adobe apps.
JET

Similar Messages

Why are EPS files preferred when dropping a logo into a publication?

I need to send a logo to several printers who will be dropping it into publications that they produce for my client. Most of the printers have requested EPS files. Can someone explain why EPS seems to be the preferred file format in this situation? What is the advantage over PDF? Thanks.

I agree with Mylenium. I was just about to post the fact that there are many types of PDF readers and authoring/editing packages out there, much more than for EPS. You won't find an EPS viewer on an Android phone as quickly as you would find the PDF viewer that comes preinstalled on many of them with Quick Office or DataViz's Office package. So the benefit is that people who are on the go could pre-approve your logo and pass it on to whomever is doing the final graphics, if the workflow requires a middle-man. I am not a professional but have noticed the improvements to certain technologies when it comes to PDF. I worked in a copy & print service and we always requested PDF's to work with or to copy from, not EPS. If it had to be raster then we required 300dpi JPG's or TIF's. It wasn't a premier service but it was good enough to get lots of work done and we never worked with EPS.
One thing I will say for people working in 3D, many packages now accept AI files (as opposed to other vector formats such as Illustrator PDF, CDR, Corel PDF or whatever else) but it wasn't until recently that one of the major special effects packages accepted AI format--it was EPS or DXF (coming out of AutoCad) if you wanted 2D vector data into your 3D environment to do further modeling with.

EPS files in InDesign CS5/CC

Why EPS files slow down InDesign CS5 and even InDesign CC? How to optimize it? Thx

Perhaps its to do with your preferences for displaying?
Go to Edit>Preferences and the Display Performance
Set "Vectors" to the middle in the sliders.
In your document go to View>Display Performance and pick the Typical setting
And also tick the "Clear Object Display Settings"
You should also try and use .ai instead of EPS

Info panel not displaying eps info

I cannot get the ppi information to display in the info panel. Is this some new spangly feature of InDesign, or a bug?

Clarification of what is claimed, and why we are perpetuating this conversation.
John, that's jut nit picking at what I said.
Sorry, I tried to make it clear, it's a nit but I think it is a very important one. Please feel free to disagree. But when we're talking about whether a file format that's important to people is doing to be supported, or is going to go away, it's very important to be clear about the public statements that have been made. Similarly, I do get bothered when EPS is described as "archaic" or "obsolete." It fills needs that are not filled by PDF or AI files, and while it is certainly older than PDF, it is of peer age to TIFF and JPEG. It is certainly less frequently used, and in many applications there are better choices (like PDF). But not in all.
The issue of "double standards."
John, nor do you really say why you think EPS is preferred. Double standards here.
I'm sorry, but please reread my post. I do not say that "EPS is preferred." I talk about several things it can and cannot do, and explain why, for instance, it and PDF show some of the same deficiencies in InDesign's Info panel. I tell you some reasons that I like it. But I do not in fact believe that it is a "better" format most of the time, and make no such claim. It is unfair to ask me to substantiate claims I did not make. I tried to be quite careful on this one.
Yes, generally PDFs are better. But.
You have produced quite a link storm there, but I'm afraid they don't do a terribly clear job of explaining why these other formats are better than EPS, and for exactly which applications. If your point is to say that in general, one should not prefer EPS over PDF, then that's fine. I think it is a true statement.
What bothers me about the statements in this thread (and this forum in general frequently echoed on this forum) is that it is wrong to use EPS; that EPS is obsolete; that Adobe InDesign will drop support for EPS; that EPS is archaic. That's simply not the case. It might be the wrong format for bigdrunk (it probably is; but we don't really know what he is doing). It is not the wrong format for everyone.
Addressing the external links/references
But we should be clear on what we're talking about. Your initial link, to Real World Illustrator's What's in a file? does a great job of describing the output formats from Illustrator. It doesn't really make a recommendation, other than to note that PDF supports some features that EPS does not. Transparency being the key point, and we've mentioned that only four times before your post. I'm not sure if that's the "plain as day" or not.
Adobe's David Evans' psvspdf post similarly discusses both formats, and suggests that EPS is a replacement for PDF -- which it is. But that only gets you so far. It doesn't address the fact that PDF files can have downsides compared to EPS files (many articulated above in the thread), but really just says that PDF can do most of the things that EPS can do. That's certainly true. After all, you can put EPS files inside PDF files! But that doesn't tell you that you're better off writing to a PDF file in any particular case. To pick a few examples from above, some apps can only read EPS files and can't read PDF files. And others can generate EPS files much more easily than they can generate PDF files.
I am rather apalled that you would cite eHow. They are rather notorious for giving bad advice that is not vetted by experts. In this case, though, the eHow post merely answers the question, "If an EPS file won't work, what are the alternatives?" It seems to do so correctly, but its not relevant to this discussion.
Craig Kirkwood's Pixel Therapy link is more general advice, for "How should I save my Illustrator work?" And again, none of us here who are speaking up for EPS are saying that it is the preferred file for Illustrator work (though I did point out that Illustrator can produce smaller EPSs than PDFs, which is bizarre).
PDF-in-AI or AI-in-PDF?
(although I disagree about saving as PDF from Illustrator with editing capabilities, best to save as ai with PDF)
Why do you think so? In general, they should be equivalent -- in both cases a PDF file is available to PDF-reading applications, and in both cases (and in Illustrator EPS, by the way), Illustrator private data is preserved for full Illustrator editing capability. I would say that distributing .PDF files is a better choice, because if a non-expert person receives a .ai attachment in their email, they are more likely to be confused about how to view, print or render it than they would be if they receive a .pdf file. That may not sound like the most compelling reason, but I can't think of one that is more compelling.
No flat recommendation of EPS over PDF.
I quite literally CANNOT find one source that recommends EPS over AI or PDF???
I wonder why that is?
To be honest, I think it is because there are very few experts on these file formats. You need to really understand the low-level file format to be qualified to offer an opinion on the merits of the file format by itself. And the merits of the file format aren't really the point most of the time -- what matters is the applications that you use, and how they handle it. Does a given application produce better PDF files or better EPS files. Does another application read EPS files better than it reads PDF files? Are there apps that read or write one but not the other? Is there a savings in file structure, in maintenance, in cost, in aggravation.
Most of the people who write about these things are aware of the ramifications and the practical effects of the choices, but not the low-level details.
Most of the time the low-level details do not matter. But they do indeed matter to some of us, and it is those of us who have spoken up in this thread.
In favor of EPS, but in a limited way.
Why EPS is sometimes better.
Can you explain why you think EPS is better than ai or PDF? Can you point me to any online sources, or books?
As we have enumerated in this thread (and the other recent one, I guess), EPS has the following potential advantages over PDF; they may not be important to you, but they are sometimes important to some of us in some cases:
1. It can be easily authored by humans and tools without requiring complex tools to convert into intermediate formats (e.g. Acrobat Distiller; pstopdf or GNU Ghostscript; expensive libraries to produce PDF output);
2. If appropriately written, it can produce human-readable ASCII output that can be understood by someone familiar with EPS. For programatically generated output, seeing that the code says "Draw a circle at coordinates (1 inch, 1 inch)" can be extremely valuable. In such an EPS file, that might be "1 inch 1 inch drawcircle."
3. Bitmap binary data can be more efficiently JPEG encoded in EPS than in PDF. (I was not aware of this, and do not know it to be the case. But Uwe mentions it.)
4. Gernot's point regarding direct CMYK specifications. I'm honestly not sure what it is, so I won't try to explain it.
5. Some apps output cleaner EPS files than they do PDF files. Apparently Illustrator is one such app. Which is bizarre.
6. Some applications/clients/specifications require EPS, such as the CUMULUS database.
As for AI, well, as we've already said above AI and PDF are essentially equivalent, as both can contain PDF images and Illustrator private data. But EPS is certainly better than Illustrator private data because it is an open, well-documented standard. Anyone with enough time on their hands can interpret an EPS file acording to a public, published spec that's been around for years. There are free and commericial software PostScript renderers, and there are an abundance of PostScript printers. None of those things are true for AI.
The rest.
What's left? I think that's really about it. You've spent quite a bit of time arguing against a position I do not think anyone was adopting.

Is it ok in the long run to placing a RGB photoshop eps file into a Illustrator CS2 CMYK color mode

Is it ok in the long run to placing a RGB photoshop eps file into a Illustrator CS2 CMYK color mode document ?
I am using windows XP with Adobe Creative suite 2.
In both Adobe Photoshop CS2 and Illustrator CS2 have the same color settings.
If I take a RGB file that was created in Photoshop CS2 and place this file in a CMYK color mode document in Illustrator CS2, does this cause a problem for the output of the document ?
If you look at the ''Document Info'' window you can now see that the RGB file is now a CMYK file. Is this a good working habit ?
Thanks in advance. :)

>Is it ok in the long run to placing a RGB photoshop eps file into a Illustrator CS2 CMYK color mode document ?
Please explain why you would do such a thing? (Why RGB, and why EPS.)
>If I take a RGB file that was created in Photoshop CS2 and place this file in a CMYK color mode document in Illustrator CS2, does this cause a problem for the output of the document ?
Yes.
You are working in CMYK mode presumably because your Illustrator document is destined for output on a PostScript device -- e.g., a printing press. That means that your RGB image will undergo a space conversion somewhere in the process, and the questions are when and how?
The issue is compounded by the fact that Illustrator ignores color profiles embedded in EPS files by Photoshop. (Just another reason not to use EPS.)
By performing the conversion yourself in Photoshop, you take control of the process and ensure predictable color.

Photoshop EPS not saving vector data?

I have a Photoshop CS3 file with 2 layers that use vector masks. I saved the file as an .eps and checked "Include Vector Data." I placed the .eps in an InDesign document. On screen everything looks fine, but if I print to PDF the vector mask layers are missing; likewise if I open/rasterize the .eps file in Photoshop the vector mask layers are gone. It prints fine if I place the original .psd file in the InDesign doc. Any ideas why .eps doesn't appear to save the vector data? Thanks...

I understand that eps doesn't support layers, and that vector data will be rasterized if I open the eps in photoshop. That's not the issue; the issue is the vector layer data is being *discarded* and is not making it through the workflow: eps placed into an InDesign document and distilled to PDF.
Update: I merged all layers in the psd file except for 1 vector layer & saved as an eps. When I reopened the eps in photoshop, it tells me it's rasterizing eps data, but when the file opens the imagery from the vector layer is missing. Likewise, if I place the eps in InDesign and distill a pdf, the imagery from the vector layer is missing, even though it appears in the onscreen preview in InDesign. Maybe something is screwy with that mask?

Illustrator CS5 Mac - slow opening EPS from SMB share

Hi folks,
Have a customer that is having an issue with opening EPS files in Adobe Illustrator CS5 15.0.2 (all updates applied) on a Core i5 iMac (8 GB RAM) under Mac OS X 10.6.6.
It will take minutes to open up a larger size EPS file (98 MB in one test case extensively). I can copy this same file to the local disk in a matter of a second or two, and the file opens in 5-6 seconds, as opposed to several minutes. Looking at Activity Monitor, I don't see significant CPU utilization but network througput pegs at 4.2 MBit. I've confirmed the switch and the iMac are both seeing 1000Mbit, full duplex.
Interestingly enough, if I take said .EPS file and save it as an .AI file, and copy that up to the server (couple seconds, file size drops to 68 MB), I am able to open the file off the server in seconds. It's only when it's EPS format is there a problem. Of course, the customer's output device RIP will not accept anything other than .EPS, so changing workflows and file formats isn't an option.
I duplicated this performance issue on multiple machines on their network, so it's not just an issue with one computer, but all of them. I am not privy to the details of the server, have an email in to ask.
I know that Adobe generally does not recommend working directly off a file server; however I'd venture to say that most 3+ person design/production groups do exactly that. If .AI works correctly, can't see why .EPS wouldn't...
--Robert

Replying to my own post...
It was Suitcase Fusion 3 and its Illustrator CS5 auto-activation plugin. Disabled the plugin, performance delays go away.
I've written this up for Extensis:
http://forums.extensis.com/jforum/posts/list/3560.page

What's a reasonable file size for a poster?

Hi everyone,
I've created a poster that is going to be printed on 2 by 1,5 metres. It's in .eps format but it's like 2GB large. It has 118 ppi.
How can I compress this a little without damaging the quality?
Thank you so much for your help =)

Good day!
Why eps?
Both pdf and eps can employ lossy compression (jpg) but that does naturally affect the image quality, though with high Quality settings the effect may be practically imperceptible.
118 ppi sound sufficient for that size.
Resolution for print viewing distance
Regards,
Pfaffenbichler

Text quality in Photoshop

I'm a photographer who only ever really uses Photoshop CS2 and I have no experience with Illustrator whatsoever. I recently designed a quality leaflet with minimal text, added in Photoshop, but when printed in lab the text has a blurry edge like colour bleed. The printer has since advised that it's always advisable to format text in Illustrator and import to Photoshop. Is this true? If I than flatten to Jpeg, as the printer's preferred file format, will the same blurred affect not still occur?
Probably a basic issue here but as you can see I'm really confused. Any advice would be gratefully received. Obviously due to the large costs involved I don't want to rush out and purchase Illustrator to find I'm still presented with the same outcome. Thank you

Rene,
I was just questioning why EPS was 'required' when PDF offers the same features of EPS and a few more.
TIFF and PSD will not include font data so the recipient will need the same font files installed.
Kate,
Printers that exclusively use JPG files fall under the cafepress.com realm for specialty/novelty printing. They can get away with this on mugs and t-shirts. For a leaflet, you'd want a better quality printer. If you are limited to that printer, see if they can support 600 or 1200 ppi in the JPG file. 300 ppi is just too messy for general type. You might get away with a decent print at 300 ppi if the type is over 36 pt or so.
Something seems very odd with this particular printer. Does this printer have a web site address you can share that might explain their capabilities or requirements for artwork?

When saving .tif or .eps files, it usually erases the last 2, 3 or 4 letters, why? ("as copy" issue)

hi again
this is a question i wanted to ask the last couple of years:
it doesnt depend on CS5 or CS4, i guess nearly all newer versions
of photoshop erase some letters at the end of a filename, when saving as tif or eps, and the file was a photoshop .psd layer file before.
i am working with many masks, so when i finish a psd layer file and want to save it as tiff (without layers and path) for sending out to client,
i press "apple+alt+S" and the "save as" window checks "copy" as default, of course, i want to preserve the original filename without "..copy"
so i uncheck "save as copy", and then there are some letters missing, i have to manually replace the letters by the original ones.
thats very awkward and time consumptive, is there a better workaround, you could suggest?
is this my fault, maybe wrong workflow? what could i change, in order to avoid photoshop erasing letters in filenames, when saving?
what could i do, that "save as copy" wont appear anymore? i am always saving in another folder than the layer file folder,
but i can only select the folder after photoshop has checked "save as copy" by itself very quick, as it thinks i want to save the tiff file
into the .psd layer file folder...
i am usually manually editing the filename in the finder later,
as it has been very important for myself to stay with the original filename
as clients use the images in indesign, so it can auto-update, if the filename is the same as before.
thanks for any help!

thanks for your answer!
i am dealing with this problem within 1 or 2 years now, i guess.
photoshop always shortens my original filename, when i press "save as"
i am experiencing this problem on 3 macs, on different locations
(in my homeoffice and at another office i work freelance) (very different macs and photoshop versions (from CS3 to CS5)
like:
original filename "vitra_woodenchair_hires_cmyk_original.psd" will be shortened to "vitra_woodenc copy.TIF"
i have to edit the files after that manually in the finder, as i send it back to clients, and they need their original filenames.
i also wonder why photoshop cs5 always wants to save a copy -
i never needed a copy of a file in my life, so why "save as copy" please?
i guess my problem is depending more or less only on the "save as copy" thing,
as it looks like, that the letters "copy" are erasing the end of my filename.
is there anything i can do, that photoshop wont suggest me a "save as copy" ever again?
can i switch it off?
your suggestion of scripts is nice, i doubt, i am able to install a script at different macs, i never ve been dealing with
scripts before, it seems to be too complicate or it just sounds complicate to me, as i dont have specific
file save destinations, i save at different places on different mac servers in the mentioned offices. also i save
different kind of file types, sometimes psd, tiff, eps, jpg, png and all others...
i try deleting .plist now and report back
thanks meanwhile...

Why the Finder doesn't make diefference between CS3 illustrator .eps and CS3 Photoshop .eps when I double click on a file?

The finder used to make difference between Illustrator ans Photoshop .eps files except sometomes when these files came from a Windows PC, but now it doesn't work anymore and all .eps files are considereds as Photoshop .eps files.
How can I revert to original default settings?
Thanks. :-)

Prior to Snow Leopard, Mac OS actually remembered what app created a file, and used that app when you double-clicked a file. Now, Snow Leopard goes entirely by the suffix, modified by any particular settings you have made for that file in Get Info.
If you want to recreate the old behavior, there is a third-party package called LaunchCodes that claims to do this.
More information about the removal of the creator code here:
http://www.cultofmac.com/how-snow-leopard-ditched-creator-codes-and-why-it-matte rs/15928

Why does placed eps file containing a drop shadow lose transparent background?

When I place an eps file from adobe illustrator cs6, which has a drop shadow, into InDesign the file loses its transparent background and comes in with a solid white background. I'v selected the "Transparent" radial button in Illustrator while saving the file to eps but it doesn't work. Any ideas???

EPS means Encapsulated PostScript (it's really PostScript code wrapped up in a capsule that allows you to place it into other applications as an image), and the PostScript specification doesn't include transparency. That's why even though you have transparency in the Illustrator image, it's format won't translate that transparency data into usable transparency when you place it into InDesign. Lack of transparency support is one of the main reasons people recommend not using eps in a modern workflow.

Why does this EPS graphic in my title keep disappearing?

Someone sent me a logo in the form of an EPS file. I used it in a title frame and it was visible both in the title and when I put it in my timeline. Then I went to watch it and it wouldn't show up. I did it a second time, recreating the title frame, and it remained visible until I exported and now it is once again not appearing in either the timeline or the exported video. Does anyone know why this is or have any solutions? Thanks in advance.

what have you tried already?

Why do eps files change in size when I open them in AI cc

I have a customer that often submits epss. When I open them in Illustrator CC it always opens them as 8.5 by 11 instead of 3.75 by 2.25 size they should be. If I use preview to open them they are the correct size. Does any one know why this might be?

See my other answer above.
No, Adobe has not updated EPS (or postscript anyway) since the last century.
A PDF includes allways trim, bleed, media and object boxes, EPS does not. If you get such information when you open an Illustrator EPS than it is because it contains an AI part in its file which is responsible for everything Illustrator or PDF like.
Here are some threads why to avoid PostScript:
Re: Print To PDF(What is said about PostScript is valid for EPS too.)
Re: Issues with trapping a postscript file out of Indesign
And many other.
Best is not to use PostScript anymore.

Why is my Illustrator file so large, the EPS file is only linked?

I have an Illustrator CS4 file. I have a 20MB EPS file that I have placed as a link in it. When I go to save it, the Illustrator file becomes 100MB!!
Why is this happening? Am I not checking the correct settings when saving the Illustrator file?
Please advise. Thanks!

As mentioned already, with certain options data will always be embedded. That would especially be true if the linked file is part of a larrger construct with belnding options, clipping masks etc., requiring to produce additional clipping paths and objects when creating PDF data.
Mylenium

Why .eps?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for