Often, instructions for authors make a fuss about wanting figures in CMYK format (referring to cyan, yellow, magenta and black inks which printers use) rather than RGB format (the red, green and blue light that computer monitors use), e.g.
http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/gta/3c_Final_artwork.pdf
However, researchers usually produce figures which are fundamentally RGB (e.g. digital photographs, scans, images created in scientific software like MATLAB, or figures put together in Powerpoint).
My understanding of the process of converting from RGB to CMYK is that it is best done with:
(a) expensive professional graphics software (like Adobe InDesign or QuarkXPress, etc.), to which many research groups will not have access, but all journal production offices should;
(b) knowledge of the colour profile (e.g. ICC profile) of the printing/press hardware (e.g. Nature hopefully print their journal hard copy on a better printer than the one in my office...)
Furthermore, many readers view journal articles on computer monitors (via PDF and/or HTML versions) rather than printing them out, in which case the original RGB version should be better than the RGB-to-CMYK-back-to-RGB version.
For these reasons, it seems far more sensible for the journals to ask for figures in RGB and then to convert to CMYK as part of their pre-press pipeline. They could then use the RGB originals in the HTML version. PDF versions could be either RGB or CMYK, or journals could even offer a choice of both (just as some journals offer a choice of PDFs with different resolutions, for printing or viewing online).
Lastly, expecting the journal's production office to spend a little time converting RGB to CMYK doesn't seem unreasonable to me given how high article processing charges are (for open access articles, which aren't paid for via the similarly high subscription fees), e.g. many journals charge USD 3000 for processing paid open access articles.
Am I overlooking some counter-arguments? Or should authors ask/petition journal publishers to remove this requirement from their submission instructions?
RGB mode is best suited for screen view.
However, color printers tend to have a black line separate so tht no color is wasted in printing just a black tone. so that instead opt for CMYK.
point is, RGB and CMYK color space have different scope, so a color image in RGB might look pretty different in CMYK and vice versa. In order to avoid any contraversy, authors are ask to change the color space to CMYK from RGB or any other so that authors are aware that how it might look after printing, cause converion on publishers side might produce a different and objectionable image.
I'm very pleased to discover that Elsevier have sensible instructions on this topic, quoting from the PDF available here:
http://www.elsevier.com/author-schemas/artwork-and-media-instructions
"We ask for RGB in order to ensure that your color artwork can be published online at the highest possible quality. RGB is the color space that has the highest number of available colors. [...] RGB files will be converted to the CMYK (Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, blacK) color space for the print process."
Confusingly, Wiley seem to have different instructions in different places.
http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/digill.asp
suggests only CMYK. But
http://authorservices.wiley.com/electronicartworkguidelines.pdf
says "Colour art destined for print publication should be in CMYK mode. [...]
Colour art destined for online publication should be in RGB mode." Which I agree with, but would argue that almost all journal articles these days are destined to appear online, with some but not all of those getting printed as well. So I would stand by my suggestion that providing RGB and allowing the publisher to convert when printing makes the most sense.
@Saurabh, I would argue that if I convert an RGB figure to CMYK, it might be the case that my CMYK version looks rubbish (because I have used rubbish software and/or an ICC profile for my rubbish printer), but if I sent the publisher the RGB version, they could make a lovely CMYK version for their professional press equipment. Furthermore, if I only provide the converted CMYK and not the RGB original, then I condemn the online version to use the restricted gamut for no reason.
My hypothesis is that journal's "Instructions for Authors" just ask for CMYK because that's what they started doing decades ago, when they had no online publication. I think it's time authors challenged journals about this out-dated and inconvenient requirement.
@Gerard. Trust me, RGB to CMYK conversion, if goes rubbish in your PC, it will go in their PC too. It does minially depend on PC or software, but mainly on colors u choose. Remember the differences arise due to the fact that RGB and CMYK are different color spaces.
http://s1.hubimg.com/u/7783340_f260.jpg
THis link can give an idea, how and why a RGB>CMYK conversion can sometimes give unexpected reults, that might cause dataloss, for eg, two series in a bar graph loosing color differences.
I'm afraid that example only reinforces my opinion; clearly some professionally printed journals include reproduction of brighter blues than are present on the CMYK panel, which has presumably been created assuming a rather poor quality production process. Again, I think the journal knows (or at least should know) better than the researcher what colours they can reliably print.
@Gerard
"the journal knows (or at least should know) better than the researcher what colors they can reliably print"
I agree.
and that's my point. The default mode in most of the graphics software is RGB and the researcher will never understand that on printing the image will look differently. And therefore the researcher itself shall know how will it look in CMYK
Converting from RGB to CMYK is one thing and and problematic thing as others have noted. If you (as the author) are the one creating the image, then presumably you should be able to create both RGB and CMYK from the source, not just as a conversion. This would (or at least should) be far more reliable than any conversion and also, as Saurabh suggested, you (as the author) are the only one that would truly know if it's right.
Actually, the kind of figures are more suitable to view online and for printing....
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication