On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 02:39 -0400, Marc Paré wrote: > Yes, this is definitely a point that must be considered. We still need > to try to keep this as manageable as possible, but if we need 2 versions > to simplify the process, then we can do a grayscale at the same time as > the coloured version. > > Is the conversion a requirement that was established by ourselves or > Lulu's? Is this standard practise and a "must" when sending files to > print in greyscale? > > I wonder if there is also a way to complete the conversion with another > tool other than Acrobat Pro. We also need to keep this as accessible to > other contributing members. Acrobat Pro retails for approximately US$450 > which puts it out of reach for many. We should really look for FOSS > alternatives. Let us know if we can help with this. >
No one needs to do those steps except the person who submits the files to Lulu. Therefore NO ONE else needs Acrobat Pro. Other contributors merely create a PDF from LibreOffice in the usual way. At this time, I am the only person publishing the books on Lulu, and I have a copy of Acrobat Pro, so it is not a problem. (Gary Schnabl also has a copy, and others may as well.) If and when The Document Foundation chooses to have its own Lulu account, then this would become an issue. AFAIK, conversion to grayscale before submission to Lulu is not required. However, saving to PostScript and redistilling using Acrobat Distiller seems to be required for the files to print reliably on all of Lulu's printers. (Which printer does the work depends on where the purchaser of the book is located.) Lightning Source, Lulu's main printer, states that PDFs MUST be produced using Acrobat Distiller to ensure the files print okay. --Jean -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
