I was out shopping in the mall yesterday with my fiancee. In one of the clothing stores I came upon a catalog. I was surprised and pleased with the quality of the printed piece. First and foremost, I was pleased to see print collateral in a digital age. I strongly believe in the efficacy of multichannel marketing. After all, something has to drive people to websites. I could see that in this clothing store there were catalogs to help visitors take with them a bit of the shopping experience, as a stepping off point to the Internet, to another visit to the mall, or as an introduction to the clothing brand.
A Description of the Print Catalog
What struck me first was the rough surface of the catalog paper. This felt right, since all of the clothing in the magazine had texture: wool with patterns, layered outfits, and macrame and other knotted effects.
It seemed a perfect choice to have what felt like an uncoated cover as an introduction to the print catalog. The lack of a cover coating made the paper seem to absorb all light, and it gave a soft and muted look to the cover model, her clothing, and her surroundings.
I looked at the interior paper under a bright incandescent light and noticed that it did have a bit of a sheen. It looked as though the designer had chosen a matte sheet to give a less polished look than a dull sheet, but still had opted for a coated paper to give the photos a crisp look. Since a paper coating provides a harder surface on which the ink can sit, and therefore keeps it from seeping into the paper fibers, the designer’s choice of a matte sheet gave the images a bright, highly detailed look.
When I looked again at the cover, I did see the faintest sense of a cover coating. My educated guess at this point is that the designer had added a varnish in spite of this being an uncoated paper.
Normally it is not the best idea to run a varnish on an uncoated sheet. Since it seeps into the paper fibers, the lack of ink “hold out” minimizes the effectiveness of the varnish both as a protective device and as an aesthetic statement. After all, you can barely see it.
My expectation is that the varnish had been added to maintain the more natural, muted effect of the uncoated sheet while slightly improving the durability of the ink. I have seen this done before, albeit infrequently. I think it works here.
The Photos in the Print Catalog
I was struck by the almost flawless skin of the models and the subtle transitions of color over the surface of the images. So I brought out my loupe.
The most dramatic part of the image under the loupe was the small size of the halftone dot. At first I thought the halftones had been created with an especially fine halftone screen (perhaps 200+ lpi), but I saw upon further observation that all halftone dots were the same size. In addition, there were no rosettes (the circular patterns of halftone dots visible in most screened images).
I thought about what I was observing and realized that the images in the fashion catalog had been printed with stochastic screening technology. Unlike traditional halftones that include halftone dots of various sizes all arranged on a grid and equidistant from one another, stochastic screening (also known as FM, or frequency modulated, screening) positions dots of equal size all over the halftone image. In areas that are dense, there are more of these equal-size dots, and in light areas with minimal ink coverage, there are fewer dots. In contrast, traditional screening (also known as AM, or amplitude modulated, screening) involves rotating each of the four process color screens at a slight angle to the others (to avoid moire patterns), and this creates the circular rosette patterns present in most halftones but absent in this print catalog.
It worked extraordinarily well in this catalog. The images almost looked like continuous tone photographs, and this highlighted the beautiful skin tones, outdoor backgrounds, and fiber art and clothing.
As an aside, I have even heard of (and seen samples of) halftone images that use hybrid screening technology, which combines both AM screening and FM screening.
Black and White Quadtone Images
One other technique used effectively in the fashion print catalog was the four-color black and white image. Through the loupe, and even with the stochastic screening, I could see the vaguest hint of cyan, magenta, and yellow halftone dots intermixed with the black dots in the halftones.
There were only two of these quadtone black and white images (both with a wide range of tones made possible by the four separate halftone screens), but they were elegant, and the technique reflected the stately tone of their content. What made them so effective was that by removing the color (or the appearance of color), the designer had made the photos look old fashioned. In so doing, he or she also drew attention to the aesthetic tone of the photos. The photos were not just a rendering of a product, a particular dress, but rather a stylized piece of art.
How You Can Apply This to Your Work
If your subject matter lends itself to almost continuous tone imagery, ask your printer about FM screening. It may cost a bit more, but for fashion, food, and automotive imagery this can be worth it. I have even seen the work of printers specializing in stochastic screening. In their case, this technology may not cost extra.
Also, choose printing papers integral to the design of your catalog. Don’t make the paper choice an afterthought. If you want a more natural feel, choose an uncoated paper. For a more slick, corporate tone, you may want to select a gloss stock instead. Or if your subject matter warrants it, choose something in the middle—a matte or dull paper substrate.
And consider four-color black and white imagery. We have grown so accustomed to full-color imagery that a black and white photo can be particularly dramatic just because it’s not expected.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, November 27th, 2014 at 7:07 pm and is filed under Catalog Printing.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.