Skip to main content
J
jamesingentilly
Participant
June 11, 2023
Answered

Help please -- 3m x 8m 1-page banner project with 13 images exporting to PDF/X too large

  • June 11, 2023
  • 4 replies
  • 1380 views

A project for a 8m x 3m printed backdrop for the main stage of our annual city fair has to go to our banner printer in two days!

Our printer has asked us to work at ½ size and to provide a CMYK PDF/X-4:2010 with a maximum file size of 500MB at 300 dpi.

Our InDesign document is 4 meters by 1.5 meters, at 200pi  and 250dpi the final PDF file size is perfect (less than 100 MB), at 300 dpi ti jumps to 1 GB!

WHY?

 

The project is one very large bit-mapped image and a frieze of 13 small bit-mapped images below.

The Indesign help team suggested we place our images as PNGs at 300dpi (rather than TIFFs or PSDs and one PSB) and export the project as PDF/X-4  with the proper ICC Fogra 39 CYMK profile.

Our problem:  with all the images in PNG at 200DPI the output pdf is 71MB. at 250DPI the final ODF is 95 MB, BUT AT 300 DPI the PDF is 1 GB!

Any ideas? Why? 

 

TIA for any advice

James in Paris France  (actually in Gentilly, next to Paris)

 

ps... I'm attaching a screenshot so you can see the project...

 

We lost a whole day doing the project as TIFF files in QuarkXpres that kept crashing when exporting the project to PDFs. I assumed using PNGs in InDesign would be a better solution since the file sizes are much smaller.

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Correct answer jmlevy

    but isn't jpeg a lossy format whereas PNG is lossless? 

    Je réponds en français par facilité : ce qui dégrade le plus un jpeg c'est une série d'ouvertures, de modifications et d'enregistrements successifs, et cela dépend aussi du taux de compression appliqué à l'image au moment de l'enregistrement.

    J'ai travaillé pendant plus de 15 ans dans un groupe de presse magazine qui édite plus de 30 mensuels et hebdos. Cela revient à plusieurs centaines de milliers d'images par an. Toutes ces images ont été enregistrées en jpeg et placées comme tel dans InDesign. Les seuls problèmes de qualité d'image étaient dus à des images pourries à la base (résolution insuffisante, taux de compression trop fort). Pour ta bannière de fond de scène, il est absolument impossible qu'un œil humain placé de l'autre côté d'une scène, même au premier rang soit capable de distinguer un problème de compression sur un jpeg (sauf – je le redis pour être parfaitement clair – si ladite image a été dès le début enregistrée avec un taux de compression trop fort).

    4 replies

    Robert at ID-Tasker
    Robert at ID-Tasker
    Legend
    June 11, 2023

    Have you tried to optimise it in the Acrobat? 

     

    And why top part had to be done as a bitmap?

    It looks like bunch of vectors? Can you / are you willing to convert it to a vector format?

     

    jmlevy
    Community Expert
    jmlevyCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    June 11, 2023

    Je suis absolument d'accord avec les commentaires de @Peter Spier sur le fait qu'il est totalement inutile d'avoir une résolution de 300 ppp pour une bannière de cette taille,  d'autant plus qu'elle est située loin des observateurs. Mais si tu veux (ou tu dois) respecter impérativement les demandes de l'imprimeur, je te suggère d'utiliser des jpegs plutôt qu des png et de faire des essais d'export en jouant sur les taux de compression, de qualité d'image et de sous-échantillonnage.

    J
    jamesingentillyAuthor
    Participant
    June 11, 2023

    thank you jmlevy (merci) and Peter Spier and "Test Screen Name"  for your rapid replies and suggestions.

     

    Tomorrow we should have a "press proof"  (BAT bon à tirer) from the printers.  with the 200ppi pdfs...

    converting our big PSB image to jpg is an option I  haven't tried yet... but isn't jpeg a lossy format whereas PNG is lossless? 

    My latest iteration is all the little pictures on the bottom at 300ppi and the big (full-size image) at 250ppi.

    From the audience POV we're hoping the image will be sharp enough.

     

    I still don't understand why changing the ppi of the big image from 250ppi (PNG  401MB) to 300ppi (PNG 715MB) increases the size of the final PDF TEN times! from 106MB to 1 GB ...  maybe I don't understand the math...

    or is it weird?

     

     

    jmlevy
    Community Expert
    jmlevyCommunity ExpertCorrect answer
    Community Expert
    June 11, 2023

    but isn't jpeg a lossy format whereas PNG is lossless? 

    Je réponds en français par facilité : ce qui dégrade le plus un jpeg c'est une série d'ouvertures, de modifications et d'enregistrements successifs, et cela dépend aussi du taux de compression appliqué à l'image au moment de l'enregistrement.

    J'ai travaillé pendant plus de 15 ans dans un groupe de presse magazine qui édite plus de 30 mensuels et hebdos. Cela revient à plusieurs centaines de milliers d'images par an. Toutes ces images ont été enregistrées en jpeg et placées comme tel dans InDesign. Les seuls problèmes de qualité d'image étaient dus à des images pourries à la base (résolution insuffisante, taux de compression trop fort). Pour ta bannière de fond de scène, il est absolument impossible qu'un œil humain placé de l'autre côté d'une scène, même au premier rang soit capable de distinguer un problème de compression sur un jpeg (sauf – je le redis pour être parfaitement clair – si ladite image a été dès le début enregistrée avec un taux de compression trop fort).

      Peter Spier
      Community Expert
      Peter SpierCommunity Expert
      Community Expert
      June 11, 2023

      First, PNG is a poor choice for printed materials -- it's a screen format.

      Second, you don't need anywhere near 300 PPI for a stage backdrop. Your viewing audience is going to be quite far away and won't be able to discern that level of detail. Your art place in the file at 200 PPI effective resolution should be more than adequate, and I wouldn't hesitate to go lower if necessary. You can find an expalnation of what you need at Distance-Resolution Formula 

      I'm a little perplexed by the printer saying they want a PDF of max 500 mb. The file needs the data it needs. It sounds like their equipment is ancient and the RIP is slow. For images the amount of data varies with the square of the size, which is to say if you double the dimensions and keep the same resolution you get four times as many pixels (and corresponding data) as the original which is why the file size can blow up so quickly.

      I would see what sort of results you get by placing medium quality jpeg at 200 ppi in your half-size layout. The bad news is that CMYK images have 4 channels where RGB have only 3, so you add 33% to the data-weight of your images right there. I would place the jpegs as RGB and do the conversion to CMYK in the RIP, specifying the output intent in the export settings, but you should confirm this with the printer.

      E
      Community Expert
      Eugene TysonCommunity Expert
      Community Expert
      June 11, 2023

      If it's 300ppi at half the size - then it will be 150ppi for full size.

       

      Who cares if it's a 1gb? Put on on dropbox or wetransfer and send the file. 

       

       

      jmlevy
      Community Expert
      jmlevyCommunity Expert
      Community Expert
      June 11, 2023

      Who cares if it's a 1gb? Put on on dropbox or wetransfer and send the file. 

      Even if you are right, I can assure you that in France, some printers refuse to process files if their requirements are not strictly followed. For example, most of them require PDF/X-1 and refuse X4.

      T
      Test Screen Name
      Legend
      June 11, 2023

      This sounds a normal and correct size, if it must be 300 ppi. A high resolution image the size of a bus is going to be BIG. The printer would be expecting it. Why is it a crisis for you? 1GB is not even especially large for a high format deliverable.

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
      Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices