.eps versus .ai images

Discuss functionality of QuarkXPress 2018.
For Digital Publishing functionality please refer to forums in the "Digital Publishing" group.
Post Reply
Posts: 179
Joined: 22 Feb 2010, 10:58

.eps versus .ai images

Post by MarkyBoy » 09 Aug 2018, 06:08


I've been having a lot of issues with QXP2018 and eps images - Quark have acknowledged that there is an issue with large eps files despite there not being an issue in previous versions and are apparently working on a fix.

Problems encountered are unusably slow speeds when working on the document and unreliable output to a pdf.

My question is would anyone know whether a .ai file would be handled more reliably than a .eps file? - it would be a relatively easy job to convert all my images (and there are hundreds of them) to .ai rather than to try and replace them all with psd images or similar.

Thanks for any thoughts!

User avatar
Posts: 394
Joined: 05 Jun 2013, 12:55

Re: .eps versus .ai images

Post by MikeWenzloff » 09 Aug 2018, 09:00

I use EPS for relatively uncomplicated drawings. But I have tried loading other users' more complicated ones and see issues at times.

If switching to AI, run the batch process in AI to do so as Q requires the PDF portion to be inside the file. I generally just export AI files to PDF and use the PDFs themselves but I have used AI files straight and rarely have issues. Those that have had anomalies I just rip to Tiffs and am done with it.


User avatar
Posts: 77
Joined: 18 Sep 2012, 08:39
Location: The Grand Line

Re: .eps versus .ai images

Post by UtahLlama » 09 Aug 2018, 13:50

.eps is a simpler format than .ai(with pdf compatibility)
so in theory you are going to make things worse.

the problem you are facing is that .eps is looked at as a legacy format and no longer of enough importance for modern software dtp apps to thoroughly support.
Adobe has been saying not to use it for many years.
In Ye-Olde world quark versions a placed EPS would be written in its whole Encapsulated goodness into your postscript print file, its now up to your RIP to sort it out, problems like jpeg encoding, non embedded fonts, and postscript colour arrays would still need sorting on the source file.
Later versions of Quark are still using postscript behind the scenes but when you are Exporting to PDF it has to do the work of the RIP (or Distiller) I think this is now handled by Callas technology with v2018 so it may be that feeding it pdfs instead of eps will produce more consistent results?

I'd offer the following cautions for your conversions:
• The only EPS files you can safely open and convert in Illustrator are those that were originally saved from Illustrator, you will also need to have the fonts and potentially linked images to do this successfully.
• EPS from Quark or InDesign or other random programs, you are best off Distilling to PDF and if you can outline the fonts will be safer to then open in Illy.
• EPS saved from Photoshop would be better opened in Photoshop.
• Unless the EPS is entirely raster, then opening in Photoshop will destroy any vectors so should only be used as a last resort. Remember when you open up a vector file Photoshop uses the ppi settings you last used, nothing to do with whats in the file.

Finally EPS was very good at keeping spot colours as spot colours, if Quark tried to map the colour it would more often get it wrong or fail, if Quark tried to convert the colour to another space, it couldn't do it because it couldn't get through the Encapsulation.
Its probable that if you Distill then sort out the colours in the pdf with Acrobat Colour Convert it would simplify for Quark.

Posts: 179
Joined: 22 Feb 2010, 10:58

Re: .eps versus .ai images

Post by MarkyBoy » 13 Aug 2018, 05:45

Thanks for the replies, much appreciated and all very informative.

The eps files were all made using illustrator, so if eps has these issues (as it's regarded as legacy), then I do have a few options to convert them.

1. convert all to .ai files.

2. convert all to illustrator pdfs

3. export them all to a psd file

Options 1 and 2 would be simpler and quicker, but which version (pdf or ai) would Quark handle better?

Matthias Guenther (Quark)
Posts: 2490
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 15:06

Re: .eps versus .ai images

Post by Matthias Guenther (Quark) » 14 Aug 2018, 03:43

Hi Mark,

EPS should work, can you please send me the ticket ID or bug ID, where we acknowledged the issue with these files?

Feel there should be more chatting, more tips, more user interaction?
Join us on Facebook, a forum-like group with over 2,000 QuarkXPress fans interacting:


Posts: 179
Joined: 22 Feb 2010, 10:58

Re: .eps versus .ai images

Post by MarkyBoy » 14 Aug 2018, 03:55

Hi Matthias

Complex EPS images are very much NOT okay!

I think you have been copied in with all the correspondence from Ticket #84582.

A Palaniappan and Rajwinder have been dealing with this and have sent the issue on to Quark R&D - EPS also cause large problems with image cache and cause very poor performance with Quark.

I could convert all to .ai or even pdf if that would make Quark perform better, but I can't seem to get an answer as to whether that would help.

Please try to help as my productivity has dropped off a cliff !

Post Reply

Return to “QuarkXPress 2018: General”