When I do some test prints of a pattern vs the original artwork that was used to create the pattern, the pattern version looks much darker? Looks almost like the artwork are being double. I did not scale the art - the artwork used in the pattern is identical to the original artwork. I did some other quick tests with simple drawings and scribbles within Illustrator and had the same results. Idk if it's a setting somewhere I need to adjust or something? Another interesting thing is if I save the pattern version as a pdf and open it in another program and print it - it looks like the original. I'm very perplexed. Anyone have any ideas? btw I'm using the CS6 version 16.0.0. Thanks
All the artworks used are vectors. The white areas are empty spots. The document is using sRGB color profile ( I will add color eventually). The images I attached were both printed from Illustrator.
In that case your issue is probably caused by antialiasing those holes.
It will probably be better when you release the compound path and then color all those holes white.
This depends on a variety of factors and the printing technique is one of them. If you end up printing this in offset, then the case might be different again.
Hmmm...idk if it's a compound path? The white is literally empty not white. These prints as of now are straight out of my regular black and white laser jet printer but moving forward will be used on a variety of types like fabric, digitally, etc I know colors will vary but not really concerned about that, but the pattern I made in Illustrator should look the same as the artworks I used no? If you reference my image - they are not.
You may be onto something though when looking deep into some of these layer groups I see a few shapes that say compound path...hmmm...let me see if releasing all of them then making the pattern make a difference...will let you know...thanks
Oh forgot to mention. This is just one close up detail of the whole pattern. The pattern itself is made of 5 very complex vector drawings with hundreds of points. Also I will still be adding some extra artwork also to fill in some gaps. I just want to make sure everything looks as "it should" before going to far down this road. If anything I can always make it in Photoshop.
Yeah I've been testing it out why it's leaving me perplexed ... as the same image is giving me different results in the same document. It's not making any sense to me. The only thing I'm doing different is taking the artworks and doing the necessary steps the make a pattern/swatch - like put box behind the art with no fill or color so it knows where to repeat. I don't know why the pattern would look different than the files I used to create the pattern.
But listen this may all be for naught - remember I said up there I did a small test in Illustrator - like literally drew a sqiggly line car to see if maybe the issue was in my vector artworks - the small test had the same results as the pattern in question. The pattern version appeared to be darker/almost like a stroke or doubling of the origianl in the b&W laserjet prints? I've created patterns in Illustrator before and never seen anything like this. It's doing a number on my brain lol
Hey @Monika Gause I found out something interesting...This makes a difference on the way it gets printed but why? I did a test between a pattern created with strokes and one with shapes that look like strokes/expanded strokes. The stroked design retained same weight the shape one seemed to look slightley "thicker". Any idea why this is happening? The art I'm using is shapes not strokes they just look like strokes.
Wondering if you had time to check this issue out? Or anyone here? This is very odd as it looks darker only when I create/save the design as a pattern swatch and apply to a shape then print. If I rasterize the shape with the patern for example and then print the artwork, it looks how I drew it. Even if I print it before I create a pattern swatch of it, (the original art used to create the pattern swatch) it prints how I want it. Any info related to this would be much appreciated. Thanks.
Here's a quick example I created to show you what I mean @Ton Frederiks .The top one is a stroke design to pattern creation ... the bottom is a expanded strokes or shapes to pattern creation. You can see the difference and seems minisule, but if doing a complex drawing with hundreds of points/shapes/lines/etc - it becomes exponentially noticable...and I think is why my design looks the way it does. The stroke one doesn't look like the thickness is increasing as much, but it's still is happening. Just look at how the gap is shirking in a selected area in the images I provided. Any ideas on why?
The issue I'm talking about in the file itself in illustrator you cannot notice any difference - only in the prints for some reason. I can share my example though if that will help?
I didn't see an answer to the question if you printed directly from illustrator, or created a PDF and printed that. If the latter, what was your Export settings?
What is your printer brand and model. If your "Black" is an RGB Black, then a low-res printer will be using all 4 inks to create the image and it could be gaining by the "piling-up" of ink, especially if you are printing to an inkjet to an uncoated stock, your ink may be bleeding (spreading) as well.
Hey thanks for responding. I need to write this issue a little clearer. It's not just the print that "looks darker/thicker lined". For example, say I take my illustrator pattern and rasterize it - it will look like how I originally drew it. If I print the rasterized one and the vector one side by side - same thing - rastereized one looks like the original the vector looks darker/thicker. I can't seem to figure out why the vector pattern versions of my design look darker than the original input?
19
Replies
AdChoices
