EPS vs JPG

Illustrator and/or Freehand. See my response to Stuart. Thanks for your
input !

"Oldylocks" <no> wrote in message news:101t0iesp8ha535@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Bob Hawkey" <b_lah DeleteThis @raskel.net> wrote in message
> news:101srr2j72vlbbc@corp.supernews.com...
> > Our art department has the peculiar habit of converting JPG images to
EPS
> > and then inserting the EPS file into their artwork. The final product is
> an
> > EPS file that is printed.
> >
> > My question to you guys, who undoubtedly know way more than I do:
> >
> > Is there any reason to use the much larger EPS files rather than just
> > inserting the JPG (or any other bitmap format)? This is assuming that,
> > visually, the two files are of the same quality.
> >
> > Any opinions are much appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> What software are they using to make the artwork that contains these
> eps-wrapped-jpegs?
>
> -Oldy
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG 

"Bob Hawkey" <b_lah RemoveThis @raskel.net> wrote in message
news:101t1cii362r641@corp.supernews.com...
> Illustrator and/or Freehand. See my response to Stuart. Thanks for your
> input !
>
> "Oldylocks" <no> wrote in message
news:101t0iesp8ha535@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > "Bob Hawkey" <b_lah RemoveThis @raskel.net> wrote in message
> > news:101srr2j72vlbbc@corp.supernews.com...
> > > Our art department has the peculiar habit of converting JPG images to
> EPS
> > > and then inserting the EPS file into their artwork. The final product
is
> > an
> > > EPS file that is printed.
> > >
> > > My question to you guys, who undoubtedly know way more than I do:
> > >
> > > Is there any reason to use the much larger EPS files rather than just
> > > inserting the JPG (or any other bitmap format)? This is assuming that,
> > > visually, the two files are of the same quality.
> > >
> > > Any opinions are much appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
> > What software are they using to make the artwork that contains these
> > eps-wrapped-jpegs?
> >
> > -Oldy
> >
> >
>

I've always saved images as EPS when I'm going to use them in Illustrator.

But once the image is saved as a compressed jpeg, turning it into an EPS
isn't going to improve the quality of the image. Maybe there are clipping
paths or transparencies of some kind that are added during this conversion
by the art department. Or maybe they are RGB images and they need to convert
them to CMYK?

I think there are specific reasons why you shouldn't use jpegs in pieces
that are going to be printed - maybe they don't sep right / maybe the
ripping software can't handle the jpeg?

-Oldy


>
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG 

Thanks for your comments guys, it helps to have some informed opinions!



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------

> I've always saved images as EPS when I'm going to use them in Illustrator.
>
> But once the image is saved as a compressed jpeg, turning it into an EPS
> isn't going to improve the quality of the image. Maybe there are clipping
> paths or transparencies of some kind that are added during this conversion
> by the art department. Or maybe they are RGB images and they need to
convert
> them to CMYK?
>
> I think there are specific reasons why you shouldn't use jpegs in pieces
> that are going to be printed - maybe they don't sep right / maybe the
> ripping software can't handle the jpeg?
>
> -Oldy
>
>
> >
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG 

Bob Hawkey wrote:

>Our art department has the peculiar habit of converting JPG images to EPS
>and then inserting the EPS file into their artwork. The final product is an
>EPS file that is printed.
>
>My question to you guys, who undoubtedly know way more than I do:
>
>Is there any reason to use the much larger EPS files rather than just
>inserting the JPG (or any other bitmap format)? This is assuming that,
>visually, the two files are of the same quality.
>
>Any opinions are much appreciated.
>
>Thanks
>
Firstly eps is a vector based format and jpg is a raster based format.
The quality depends on how
good the original file is, changing it to an eps is not going to make it
any better and won't change it
from a raster to a vector either. I am not sure what you are referring
to by 'artwork', what program
are they using. Most programs allow an eps to be imported but not
necessarily a jpg, this could be
the case, but as you didn't specify what program they are using then I
can't say.

Stuart
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG 

Thanks Stuart - We use Illustrator and Freehand for assembling ads that go
in the local Yellow Pages. You are, of course, correct about eps being
vector based and that obviously the quality of a bitmap will not be improved
by simply converting it to an EPS ( TIFF? ).

The main issue for me ( the IT guy ) is that the EPS version of a JPG file
is 24MB while the original JPG was 2.4MB. It seems like a lot of the
component graphics ( bitmaps really ) that the art department uses are
stored as humongous EPS files when the functional equivalent in JPG format
is 10 times smaller. Since we have 35,000 customers with ads the storage
requirements are huge and I expect dealing with a 24MB EPS is much slower
than dealing with a 2.4MB JPG when creating the ads or simply transfering
them around the network.

Frankly if the results look the same I don't know why you would use the
larger file format.

Thanks for your help!





"Stuart" <stuart.RemoveThis@nospam.uk> wrote in message
news:401E7655.4000907@nospam.uk...
>
> Bob Hawkey wrote:
>
> >Our art department has the peculiar habit of converting JPG images to EPS
> >and then inserting the EPS file into their artwork. The final product is
an
> >EPS file that is printed.
> >
> >My question to you guys, who undoubtedly know way more than I do:
> >
> >Is there any reason to use the much larger EPS files rather than just
> >inserting the JPG (or any other bitmap format)? This is assuming that,
> >visually, the two files are of the same quality.
> >
> >Any opinions are much appreciated.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> Firstly eps is a vector based format and jpg is a raster based format.
> The quality depends on how
> good the original file is, changing it to an eps is not going to make it
> any better and won't change it
> from a raster to a vector either. I am not sure what you are referring
> to by 'artwork', what program
> are they using. Most programs allow an eps to be imported but not
> necessarily a jpg, this could be
> the case, but as you didn't specify what program they are using then I
> can't say.
>
> Stuart
>
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG 

"Stuart" <stuart.DeleteThis@nospam.uk> wrote in message
news:401E7655.4000907@nospam.uk...
>
> Bob Hawkey wrote:
>
> >Our art department has the peculiar habit of converting JPG images to EPS
> >and then inserting the EPS file into their artwork. The final product is
an
> >EPS file that is printed.
> >
> >My question to you guys, who undoubtedly know way more than I do:
> >
> >Is there any reason to use the much larger EPS files rather than just
> >inserting the JPG (or any other bitmap format)? This is assuming that,
> >visually, the two files are of the same quality.
> >
> >Any opinions are much appreciated.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> Firstly eps is a vector based format and jpg is a raster based format.
> The quality depends on how
> good the original file is, changing it to an eps is not going to make it
> any better and won't change it
> from a raster to a vector either. I am not sure what you are referring
> to by 'artwork', what program
> are they using. Most programs allow an eps to be imported but not
> necessarily a jpg, this could be
> the case, but as you didn't specify what program they are using then I
> can't say.
>
> Stuart
>

An EPS file can contain both Vector & Bitmap information, it is an
"Encapsulated Postscript file".

Some older RIPs cannot handle JPEG files, so your art department are playing
safe, although I question their use of a compressed format like JPEG for
printing.
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG 

When you reach the stage where you produce files that need to be printed,
they need to be in CMYK. What tends to happen is that the yellow page
adverts are very very specific on what colours can be used and how much
yellow to use (they print the yellow onto white paper). If JPG images are
given to a graphic designer, it has to be converted into CMYK (usually with
C as 0, M around 5 Y around 30 and then the black plate holds the picture).

As has been pointed out, JPG can't hold vector infomation but more
importantly it's not a file type that the printers can actually use to
create the CMYK plates - the EPS however does contain the seperation
details. Another point is that if you wanted to reach the same quality as
vector on a printed press for text, you'd have to have *huge* images (300dpi
is the usual for photos but text is printed to well over 1000dpi). Another
reason is that JPG is a *lossy* compression - you lose detail. For
instance, if you look closely at text on in a jpg you'd notice wierd noise
which is created by the JPEG compression.

Hope this answers your question,
Cheers
Alan Bloom
 >> Stay informed about: EPS vs JPG