Need to Register?

vicobt · August 24th, 2009

Can someone help me understand why screenprinters dont usually like graphics in jpeg format to be submitted to them, cuz i have a lot of graphics in jpeg format that i wish to screenprint soon. Just curious

Thank You

PositiveDave · August 24th, 2009

jpegs are usually CMYK/RGB.
If you want to print a two colour job it will require converting to vector and separating. CMYK files separate to four plates.
Vectors are scalable without losing resolution, bitmaps such as jpeg are not.
We've all had a jpeg submitted that's been downloaded from the web at 72dpi, it will look horrible when printed.
The problem is not jpegs, it's resolution and spot colours.

jsf · August 24th, 2009

It is not likely the JPEG format which is disliked about.

You should consider giving the artist a "High Resolution" image even that is saved as JPEG and should not be in "Low Resolution."

As you will see, a high resolution image gives image clarity and sharpness.

tfalk · August 24th, 2009

Garbage In, Garbage Out...

Just because your JPG looks great on your computer monitor does not mean it will screen print well. JPG's are 'usually' sized/compressed to display well on computer monitors and web pages. When you blow them up to the size required for screen printing, it's nothing but a jumble of jagged edges. You can't blame the screen printer for telling you that your image is not acceptable unless you are also willing to accept a crappy looking print as a result...

InkedApparel · August 24th, 2009

jpeg format are not disliked only in screen printing...any type of printers do not like to use "low resulution" jpeg's.

low resulution = poor print quality.
the resulution is the main concern .....not the file extension...if you have a jpeg at full size and 150 - 300 dpi then it would be fine to use...if not the printer needs to scale it up and thats where the problems start.
vectors on the other hand are scalable to any size without loosing quality...thats why vectors are the choice of most printers.

hope this helps

Inked

joejcr · August 24th, 2009

There is a program I found a couple of years ago when I started doing dye sub printing that will take any jpg file and allow you to do a real quick conversion on the size with amazing results. It's from benvista.com and called Photo Zoom Pro.

Very inexpensive for what it does, I've taken 72 dpi web files and converted them to a print size of 13 x 19 at 300 dpi, it took the program about 1 1/2 minutes to process and the print results were unbelievable.

I don't work for the company, nor have anything to do with them, just really LOVE the program. Worth taking a look at.

FatKat Printz · August 24th, 2009

I suggest you take your images and upload them to vector magic.. because more than likely most of will have too.

Here you can see what kind of image your jpeg will look like to us and the printer. This may help you understand a little better about the resolution and its quality.

miktoxic · August 24th, 2009

hey FatKat: were you going to upload an image or link to something? maybe i don't understand.

FatKat Printz · August 24th, 2009

www.vectormagic.com you can upload your pictures and it converts them to vector images.. which is what most printers end up using..

LB · August 24th, 2009

Found this info and thought it would be helpful.

JPEG (pronounced "jay-peg") is a standardized image compression mechanism. JPEG stands for Joint Photographic Experts Group, the original name of the committee that wrote the standard. JPEG compresses either full-color or grayscale images, and works best with photographs and artwork. For geometric line drawings, lettering, cartoons, computer screenshots, and other images with flat color and sharp borders, the PNG and GIF image formats are usually preferable.
JPEG uses a lossy compression method, meaning that the decompressed image isn't quite the same as the original. (There are lossless image compression algorithms, but JPEG achieves much greater compression than is possible with lossless methods.) This method fools the eye by using the fact that people perceive small changes in color less accurately than small changes in brightness.
JPEG was developed for two reasons: it makes image files smaller and it stores 24-bit per pixel color data (full color) instead of 8-bit per pixel data. Making image files smaller is important for storing and transmitting files. Being able to compress a 2MB full-color file down to, for example, 100KB makes a big difference in disk space and transmission time. JPEG can easily provide 20:1 compression of full-color data. (With GIF images, the size ratio is usually more like 4:1.)

I prefer the Tiff format for bitmaps. Each time you save a JPEG you lose information. So, when you get one save it as another less lossy format.

ProSeparatorNJ · August 24th, 2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by vicobt


	Can someone help me understand why screenprinters dont usually like graphics in jpeg format to be submitted to them, cuz i have a lot of graphics in jpeg format that i wish to screenprint soon. Just curious Thank You

Because of the particular damage that the jpeg compression does to the image. The best way to understand it is to take an image which is not a jpeg then save it with the strongest compression. Then take a very close look at both files, before and after. What you will see in the jpeg is terrible and very unnatural destruction of the color and lines. If the original image was only somewhat difficult to separate (separations is what a screen print art dept is all about) then the jpeg version of it will be much more so. The greater the compression, the worst the result and the harder to separate with quality. The lower the resolution the less likely you will get a good separation result. And in the end, most customers who have art in jpeg format are customers who grab 72 dpi trash off the internet and want to put it on a t-shirt. Not impossible, but it takes some "knowing" to grab images off the net which will print well on a t-shirt, regardless of it's low resolution and jpeg artifacts.

ChuckDMan · August 24th, 2009

I think jpegs only have a "bad reputation" because they are usually low resolution (pulled off a website).
ANY low resolution image (jpeg, tif, etc) will look pixelated (chunky and jagged) if it is enlarged for printing.
A high resolution jpeg will be just fine.
A vector based file is always the best, because it will be sharp no matter what size it is printed at.
So the problem is not if the file is a "jpeg" file, it is if the the file is a "low resolution" image...