Placing Ai files

[kerrysr]

I am using cadtools to add dimensions to photos. I save them as .ai files and then place them in indesign. The files appear blurred intermittently. I change the view display to "high quality display" and they appear clear but then change when I move around the document.

Why does that happen?

Also, to preserve the best quality image, should I be saving the files as .ai files before I place them in indesign?

Thanks

 

[jimoblak]

View display has nothing to do with output. It is typically ideal to display in low resolution onscreen so that screen redraw is quicker.

If this changes when moving around the document, you may have display driver issues. InDesign is not designed to switch the display quality on you without your input.

Also see: faq818-4316

 

[jmgalvin]

If you're working with photos, there is no reason to put them in AI unless you want some fancy vector work. Save them as 300 dpi photoshop or tiff, cmyk color mode if going to professional print. Place those in indd.



Using OSX 10.3.9 on a G4

 

[kerrysr]

I'm not putting them in Ai.

I have photos I tweaked in Photoshop that I saved as the highest quality jpegs. (and they look great when I place them in Indesign)So far, so good.

Next I take those jpegs and bring them into illustrator.
I need to use Illustrator because of cadtools. I open a jpeg photo in illustrator, add the dimensions with cadtools, and then ...Is saving as .ai going to give me the best resolution or quality. You can NOT save them in illustrator as a jpeg. You have to export them as a jpeg. When I did that, the quality is poor compared to saving them as .ai.

Keep on mind when I say the quality is poor, I'm referring to after I place the file in Indesign. So..Files look better when I place them in Indesign as .ai. Thats why I asked is the the best way.

 

[jmgalvin]

First, you would be better off saving the photoshop work in either photoshop or tiff as they have no quality loss as compared to any compressed type, like jpeg. Every time you resave tha jpeg, it will lose quality.

As stated earlier, if you're doing vector work in AI - as you've said you're doing, you're best off saving in AI, although eps or press quality pdf are also ok. If you save into a raster format like jpeg or tiff you will lose a lot of definition in your vector/text work.

Using OSX 10.3.9 on a G4

 

[jimoblak]

If saving an unedited JPG file as a linked/placed object in an AI file, there is no concern for the further loss of quality. Illustrator is not recompressing that JPG image if it is linked/placed. The AI format is the best option here as you retain the quality of the placed bitmap while using crisp vectors for text and lines.

The intermittent display quality problem should not be caused by using AI files. I cannot explain why you see that.

If the document prints well from InDesign, I would not worry greatly about the display oddities you see onscreen.

 

[grafixenter]

The display of AI in Indy will always be poor both after you have placed and after printing. This happened to me one time I designed a cover for a newsletter in AI and lost my business after printing thinking the screen display would defer from the final print out.

Anyhow this is what I learnt to do.

I save the AI file to .pdf, preferably version 1.5(Acrobat 6), and place the pdf.

I make sure that I do not lose the linked files in Illustrator so that if I want to do some editing later, I can relink my files after opening the pdf in AI which I later save the changes that will automatically be updated in Indy.

This has greatly given me more business and saved my time.

Good Luck.

 

[jimoblak]

The display of AI in Indy will always be poor both after you have placed and after printing.

This is entirely wrong. Please explain technically before misleading others.

Check the InDesign's README file for any caveats. Otherwise, AI is a perfectly usable file format for placement in InDesign.

The AI format makes use of PDF so it makes little sense to prefer PDF over AI. If you have personally found that PDF works better than AI then you were probably not using AI properly.

 

[kerrysr]

Hi All;

Seems I created a monster with my question. For what it's worth, I took all of the advice in this forum, and here's how things turned out.

1. I made two huge mistakes. When I saved my photographs, I saved them as jpegs (highest quality) The photos themselves look superb both in photoshop and in Indesign (and print well) Still, I SHOULD have saved them as psds because then I could copy them, paste them reduce sizes etc and I would have preserved the integrity of the original file. Too late now, next time I'll save my photos as PSD.

2. Because I had to start with Jpegs in Illustrator (remember I saved the photos as jpeg) adding dimensions, then saving again in illustrator as jpegs DOES make the quality poorer (both on screen, and in print)

The forum responses were correct telling me to save my illustrator files as .ai. It DOES improve things and heres the bottom line.

Now, my dimensions look superb no matter how much you compress them because they are vectors(.ai). However, the image itself (not the dimensions, the photo) will start to deteriorate if you compress it because that part of the file was a jpeg.

If only I had started with PSD's, then brought them into illustrator and saved those as .AI, I would have perfection!

 

[jimoblak]

However, the image itself (not the dimensions, the photo) will start to deteriorate if you compress it because that part of the file was a jpeg.

I may not have been clear earlier. If you place the JPG files as linked assets (not embedded), then Illustrator will not recompress the JPG data (which would result in reduced quality with each save). Illustrator does not touch linked assets when it saves.

If you place a JPG file in InDesign, it does not lose further quality each time that you save the INDD file. The same holds true with Illustrator.

 

[jmgalvin]

Jim, not sure about this but it seems that linking the raster to the AI file and then linking that AI to an INDD could create a problem later. Since I've never done it, I don't know if packaging the INDD would pick up the raster that was linked to the AI. If not, and there are a number of such links, it could be hard finding the original rasters later on. That's why I had suggested that they could save into press quality pdf or eps.

I think the original questioner's problems started when they decided to work the photos in the jpeg format rather than saving as psd or tiff and working in that format. I sort of think that the photoshop splash screen should have big "don't edit your stuff in jpeg format" on it. It would save a lot of grief.



Using OSX 10.3.9 on a G4

 

[jimoblak]

Yes - this can cause problems if linked images are not packaged.

I am confused how Illustrator is re-encoding any bitmap data. Why should it? In the rare chance that it is, I suggested using a linked image instead of an embedded image.

Upon a quick test, I see no difference in linked vs. embedded. It may be a good idea to visit an Illustrator forum (such as at adobeforums.com where the majority of users hang out) to ask if Illustrator really re-encodes/re-compresses JPG data. EPS/AI/PDF are all data container formats: they have the ability to retain original data of other files within. It makes no sense why Illustrator would be trying to alter this bitmap data.

The fact that kerrysr noted 'I change the view display to "high quality display" and they appear clear but then change when I move around the document.' led me to believe this has nothing to do with Illustrator. I detect problems with a display driver or hardware. InDesign also relies on JPG data to make screen previews of bitmaps in InDesign. If a placed image is already in JPG form (or contains JPG data within), InDesign may use the original JPG data without making its own preview. If that JPG data filesize is humongous, it may cause InDesign's preview to act erratically since it is used to smaller JPG data for previews.

 

[jimoblak]

...also

If the photos are no longer going to be edited and the highest quality compression suits you, there is no worry about having them in JPG format. If we are so afraid of image compression, we should dispose of our DVD movie libraries at home.

 

[jmgalvin]

Jim: Here's something the original questioner said: "Is saving as .ai going to give me the best resolution or quality. You can NOT save them in illustrator as a jpeg. You have to export them as a jpeg. When I did that, the quality is poor compared to saving them as .ai."

Her problem seemed to be trying to make jpegs from the Ai file and getting creamed.

She also said in a subsequent post: "Because I had to start with Jpegs in Illustrator (remember I saved the photos as jpeg) adding dimensions, then saving again in illustrator as jpegs DOES make the quality poorer (both on screen, and in print)." When she saved out to AI she was, hopefully, ok.

We also don't know what her flattener settings were in AI. She could have had the rastor/vector balance all the way down to raster. If she had a low quality selected, those jpegs would end up pretty bad on export to that jpeg format, not to mention the softening of the vectors.

Any advice I gave regarding jpeg was not to EDIT photos while in jpeg format because of quality loss on saves.

Using OSX 10.3.9 on a G4

 

[jimoblak]

kerrysr made the statement about save vs export because they understood the difference between the output types. They did not want to save JPG files. They wanted the crisp vectors set on top of the JPG bitmap data.

It is true that we have no idea what settings were used to save the AI file or to render the file in InDesign. The fact of the matter is that AI is a perfectly suited file format, even if you have high quality JPG bitmaps to place. Something was just not done properly.