CMYK black is not a scam, you're just using it wrong

I keep seeing people say CMYK black looks muddy compared to rich black, but that's the whole point. If you're designing for a newspaper that prints on cheap stock, using pure K black with no other colors gives you crisp text without bleeding. I work with a print shop in Cleveland that runs 60,000 flyers a week and they've saved thousands by sticking to 100% K for body copy. Has anyone else had luck pushing back against the rich black trend for certain jobs?

2 comments

2 Comments

lucas1593d ago

idk maybe it's just me but this whole debate feels way overblown. like okay you saved some money on ink for cheap newspaper stock, that's fine. but most people aren't printing 60k flyers a week on literal newsprint. for a lot of jobs, rich black just looks better and doesn't cost that much more. i mean if you're doing something that's gonna get tossed in a week, sure, use pure K and move on. but for a brand's business cards or a poster that's supposed to feel premium, muddy black is just not doing anyone any favors. feels like people get really defensive about their workflow instead of just picking the right tool for the project.

cameron_craig3d ago

picking the right tool for the project" is exactly it. I read a guy's breakdown where he tested rich black on newsprint and it bled so bad the text was unreadable.