[gadster]

Has anyone got any advice on the best way to implement a pure pdf workflow? I would love to be able to print a .ps file, distill it for screen (embed fonts) for client proofing, then distill it again Press Optimised for the prepress guys.

Where I work, nearly all our print work is handled by one company.

These guys take QXDs and impose them IN QUARK(!) for output on their imagestter. This means thay have to manually change automatic page numbering, for instance! Also, if you have a colour called 'Blue', and they drop it into a default imposition, 'Blue' becomes the RGB blue that is the Quark default!! The idiots. They are really cheap though.

To be fair, 99% of the time they manage to get the job right, but every now and again, they screw up (at their cost, but to our clients detriment!).

We have enough clout with this company to suggest changes to their procedures.

I have done some preliminary reseach into this, and have alerted them to 'Quite a Box of Tricks', 'Crackerjack' etc.

A pure pdf workflow would also mean I could send layered photoshop and illustrator pdfs (yes, with the embedded vector info) without all the attendant hoo-haa of saving them out into a format quark is happy with, importing them into quark etc, etc, et(bloody)c. I hate it when I make a screen optimised pdf, for e-proofing out of quark when the images are .eps. 20mb later...

It seems like it should be so simple, Adobe PDF to Adobe Postscript.

[macspectrum]

We have a product called Purifire that does what you had asked about and more. I have posted a link to an image that shows what the product does.

Purifire pic

Please feel free to contact me for any further questions.
Michael Kulyk
MACSPECTRUM
"We make your workflow work for you."
http://www.macspectrum.com
kulyk@macspectrum.com
416-236-5585

[MikeM33]

Provided all your printer is doing is printing these I foresee no issues with only giving them PDF files to handle. The tricky part is if you ask them to edit stuff. Acrobat isn't a program that's meant for editing like Quark or InDesign.

But I guess you've got that figured out already.

My first job in the field was for a printing company which was just getting into a PDF workflow sort of thing. They used something called "Quite Imposing". With this application you can impose single PDF files into PDF templates with crops and other marks necessary for the final printing press plates.

What your printer/service bereau will need is the full version of Acrobat in order to be able to create thier own imposable templates using (insert page layour application here) and Distiller.

Once they have that implemented it's a pretty simple workflow.

I have no idea what this "auto page numbering" is about though. When I was doing this under Acrobat 4, I'd have to create a multi page template to be imposed into and then manually change the page numbers through Acrobat. They basically were just using one generic "face" and one "back" template for thier books/forms/etc. Then we'd just impose the PDF files the customer's sent us into this. Then we'd image it to film (they were still using film at the time I left).

Let me know if this helps or if you need firther help as I do know a tad about it and that end of the business (pre-press/graphics).

MikeM

[EnVoy]

We do it all with pdf's where I work. We first build files in Quark, then distill to lo res pdf's for client approval. Once approved, we distill a hires pdf that gets sent to the printer or publication.

Most of our pubs save out a eps from Acrobat, and import that into Quark to separate it. Sometimes we will still send a collected Quark doc to a printer for imposition reasons, but usually we set all the trapping, and it gets set in stone in the pdf.

[gadster]

Firstly, sorry for leaving these replies unacknowledged. I have been having some 'issues' with a cactus IBM Deskstar 40Gb HD.

macspectrum, I would have more faith in your product if your website was professionally designed. Let me know if you'd like one (hint hint).

MikeM33, thanks. Quite Imposing is made by the same people who make Quite a Box of Tricks. I may have to investigate that comany further. The Aussie dollar is strong so it may be a good time to buy some stuff.

Envoy, I think that's kind of what these guys are doing. What I want them to do is take quark out of the loop, and just print straight out of the imposition software.

And then there is color management... ARGH!

[buddhabelly]

one of the best ways is to go to a Rampage system with PREPS impostion software. we used to impose in whatever the file was designed in. pain in the ass. now w/ Rampage and PREPS, we ouptut single page eps or multiple page PDFs, rip and impose. Very tight work flow. Very fast. Very expensive. But we can take almost any file, minus MS Office and output to film.
i think Rampage is www.rampageinc.com and preps is at www.scenicsoft.com

also, don't assume that just because you go pdf all the problems w/ transparency etc will magically go away. Everything is still based on the ps language and there are inherent limitations. You could end up creating more headaches. We have a few designers locally who get all caught up in the new features, transparency, blurs etc in Illustrator especially. Their designs ultimately suffer because they don't think things through, just slap some effects etc. together and away we go.

I'm of the opinion that all designers should intern in the media they will output in. I've spent 3 years now in prepress and learned so much invaluable information that I never would have got from the university I had attended. I know because I deal withe their students and the instructors themselves as designers.

[Corys]

Originally posted by buddhabelly:

I'm of the opinion that all designers should intern in the media they will output in. I've spent 3 years now in prepress and learned so much invaluable information that I never would have got from the university I had attended. I know because I deal withe their students and the instructors themselves as designers.

Couldn't agree more..other day was running a AI10 job through rampage, I tried to explain why using the transpareny features in AI10 can cause problems with the trapping, to which I got the reply "what's trapping" Arrrgh.

[gadster]

Originally posted by Corys:
Couldn't agree more..other day was running a AI10 job through rampage, I tried to explain why using the transpareny features in AI10 can cause problems with the trapping, to which I got the reply "what's trapping" Arrrgh.

Well, that scenario is debatable. As a designer, the main consideration is getting the message across, using the tools at hand. If prepress have a technical problem, well, that is mostly their problem.

I find it hard to believe that Adobe (who invented Postscript) would implement features in its own software that parse wrong at the RIP. Does your RIP support the latest version of Postscript? If not, upgrade. There must be workarounds (rasterise the offending elements, foe example). Otherwise, put the heat on Adobe.

I have noticed a lot of mags (and ads) lately seem to be using native pdf Photoshop (or Indesign) files. Vector type with layer effects (incl. soft drop shadows) over images. I seriously doubt they are using Quark to do this.

It's impossible to be a good designer if you are hamstrung by the limitations of your outputting capabilities. Then again, you would save a lot of money working in Illustrator 88 and Photoshop 2.5!

I am convinced it can be done, and IS being done, by the big boys. Question is ... how to do it on a budget.

[Corys]

you are right..it can be done and is being done..but you might not like the results or the cost of producing the job.

same reason why you don't put 6 point white reverse type in a picture..sure we can do it but it looks like hell..

you can rasterize the effects, but that's what can cause the trapping problems..

the whole bit about a good designer being hamstrung by outputting capabilities I just don't buy

Deisgners were doing great work (with the help of awesome strippers) before the days of computers.

[buddhabelly]

>>Well, that scenario is debatable. As a designer, the main consideration is getting the message across, using the tools at hand. If prepress have a technical problem, well, that is mostly their problem.<<

It's not just a technical problem. It's a problem that affects the design, often in undesirable ways. Transparency effects in Illustrator can be rasterized at the RIP. And it rasterizes everything around it, including vector art and type, in very unpredictable ways. While it is viable to rasterize things like drop shadows while still in illustrator as long as the design is simple, ie on white background or a solid where you can simply overprint the shadow. Once you get into complex designs where you like the way you can use an alpha channel to mask or clip an image with a nice fuzzy mask doesn't work because PS interpret it correctly. Instead you get the whole imaged, not clipped with a big ugly WHITE rectangle around it, ruining your beautiful design.

>>I find it hard to believe that Adobe (who invented Postscript) would implement features in its own software that parse wrong at the RIP. Does your RIP support the latest version of Postscript? If not, upgrade. There must be workarounds (rasterise the offending elements, foe example). Otherwise, put the heat on Adobe.<<

Not only did they do it, but in AI9, it was not clearly documented what happenes when you need to output it to print when you have say a transparent block underneath type. It rasterizes everything around it and then some. I'm still not sure how it determines what to rasterize. On top of that, the default and unchangeble default at that, for rasterizing effects was at 300 dpi. Have you every seen 300dpi type output on a 2400dpi imagesetter? Not pretty. At least in AI 10 the defaults are somewhat more appropriate, and the feature is better documented.

Then you throug in things like spot color and transparency. You can't do that at all. No matter what, when you rasterize that art, the color is seperated into CMYK, RGB, or grayscayle. Practical feature? Maybe for the web. Not printing. Transparency just isn't practical for printing. Seems that AI9 & 10 had more work done on the web end.

And of course we're running Postcript 3. Rampage is certainly not a "cheap" ripping solution. It is very well implemented with the capabilities that are available. The problem is inherent with the language.

>>It's impossible to be a good designer if you are hamstrung by the limitations of your outputting capabilities. Then again, you would save a lot of money working in Illustrator 88 and Photoshop 2.5!<<

On the contrary. The design is only as good as what the technology is capable of. Postcript is not capable of handling these thing correctly.

What ever happened to think about how things can and are done? Just because computers can do lots of things, doesn't mean that everything can be done now. Things like perfect color seps from the computer are just taken for granted.

A good designer will make a good design with what is available. We still good designs done in AI3.0, using 1,2 or even 3 colors. These are just as strong, sometimes stronger, as something slapped together in 4-color for the sake of 4-color. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Also, what about being knowledgeable with the tool your using, instead of just weilding it haphazardly around? I get stuff everyday where things like spot duotones instead of being spot are in CMYK. Yeah the effect looks the same on screen. But it won't print in spot colors anymore. How many time have you had to salvage an image like that and recreate from CMYK seps back to 2 color? It's not easy, even with a computer.

>>I have noticed a lot of mags (and ads) lately seem to be using native pdf Photoshop (or Indesign) files. Vector type with layer effects (incl. soft drop shadows) over images. I seriously doubt they are using Quark to do this.
I am convinced it can be done, and IS being done, by the big boys. Question is ... how to do it on a budget.<<

It is being done, I agree. Cost is always an issue. Designs are never the same, and different things have to be figured out. Takes time, time is money, and designers are cheap. Well, everybody is cost conscious now. But alot of people believe, incorrectly, that because it is on computer, that it takes no time at all to do anything, therefore should cost nothing.

What exactly are they teaching in design school anyways? Color theory? Differences between color space, say Lab>RGB>CMYK?
Not in the school I attend. It's glossed over w/ professors telling me the students don't listen and figure once they're in the real world and have to eat a job, they might learn then. But it's not on any tests. Well as a student, if it's not going to be on the test, why bother? Maybe some do deserve to get screwed once and they'll learn. But I figure I'm paying for a FULL education.

It seems to me, now that designers not only brainstorm the idea, but actually create the whole design, then they should have the technical knowledge to assist them. Before, designers came up with the idea and other people figured out how to implement it with the tools AVAILABLE. And if it couldn't be done, especially on a budget, then it wasn't done.

I'm done.

[macspectrum]

gadster typed:
macspectrum, I would have more faith in your product if your website was professionally designed. Let me know if you'd like one (hint hint).

webpage is being re-designed as i type (hint, hint)

bad website = bad product OR bad company?

wow

our clients appreciate that our we make sure our products work is a higher priority over a nice website

all in good time i guess

1. make clients happy
...
7. make nice webiste

[MauroCol]

MacSpectrum people, your product seems too interesting.

I think it's great that your priority be the clients and the product quality.

But the Website is important too: if you are a graphics products company, what people expects is a Website graphicly good and a site a lot informative.

(It doesn't means that you may include Flash, CSS, PHP, Javascripts and more, no!).

Personally, I would like a demo version.

Regards!

[gadster]

Good points everyone, thanks for the info.

The whole area of getting a design to film is a tricky one. I may have been a bit overzealous when I said 'it is imossible to be a good designer if..." I have been using a mac for design for ten years now, so I know how to keep it simple.

A lot of our clients are community groups, activists, student organisations, unions and other low budget riff-raff, so a lot of the work is 1 or 2 colour. I often have to rely purely on typography as a design element, having no images to work with, nor budget for an illustrator.

Partly for that reason, when a new version of something comes out, I for one will go for it. Layers in photoshop, how good was that when it appeared? I wasn't going to wait to get the OK from prepress, I just used it.

I guess Adobe dropped the ball with Illustrator. Adobe better fix it fast. In the mean time, depending on the job, I will create in Illustrator, save as pdf, open with photoshop and rasterise the sucker, save as DCS 2 then drop it into quark.

With the quartz graphic engine, layered photoshop and illustrator pdfs, you'd think someone would come up with a simple impo/imaging app. I know there are probably a thousand reasons why this is not possible, too hard etc (at the moment), but whoever does it will be on to a major winner.

Also, sorry macspectrum, I didn't mean it as an insult, it was just some feedback about market perception. The product may be really good, and I would like a demo too, but it must also 'be seen to be' good. Your website is you. Would I give money to you? Not yet, come back after you've had a makeover.

In the meantime, our prepress still take too long doing manual impos and manually doing page numbering, etc.

[purplenerple]

We send pdfs to our printer every week. We create our docs. in Quark with imported eps ads and create a ps from Quark, distill at high res to send to printer. At first, this was a huge undertaking! Nothing was working, things weren't seperating, it was a mess. Come to find out, we were working higher than the printer. They did some upgrades, firstly to match our version of Quark and I believe they bought a new rip. Now it's "perfect" we have no problems with them outputting and it usually comes out good. Aside from the usual problems you generally encounter. They now take our pdfs and output directly from Acrobat. Our first step was to get a quark template from them with their registration and "skittle" marks and we work off that to build our pages. That seemed to be a HUGE step!!!! We're a newspaper so the one template is all that we needed. They also put in their pdf xtension for Quark and sometimes, when we aren't able to use their template they import the pdf onto the template they have. So far so good!