PDF-Basics is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com/ __________________________________________________________________
This post bothers me because there is no support for the claim. I've made numerous PDFs by the "old" method which have gone to press with no apparent problems: either in ripping or quality. As I see it, and there may be more to this than meets the untrained eye, when one print to the PDF printer in OS X, the saving of a PostScript file is eliminated, and Distiller runs in the background until the PDF is completed (muchlike how Windows works when one chooses the Adobe PDF printer). I used the "old" method because I kept getting a "distillsave" error and didn't have the time (at the time) to be bothered trying to figure out the cause. It was simply easier to PS the file on the Mac and distill it on the PC. Today, I searched the archives on this list and found out the error is caused by the Auto Protect function of Norton Utilities. So I turned off auto protection. Wonderful. In any event, being the curious one, today I made three PDF files from an InDesign document. The first one I PS'd and distilled. The second one I made with the print to Adobe PDF printer function. The third one I exported from InDesign. All three were made with Press Quality job options. All three files are correct. They are 300 dpi, CMYK, ready to print. The fonts are handled differently in the InDesign export version, but I was able to change a character using the text touch-up tool, so all's well there. The only visual difference between the three versions was file size (I also pre-flighted each and found no differences there, either). The PS'd versions are 784KB, while the exported flavor is 1.25MB. My experience is that distilled files are typically smaller than those which use the Adobe PDF library. So, please tell me how I could possibly get a better quality PDF (for going to print) by automatically chosing the print to Adobe PDF function (which works fine once I turned off Norton) over PSing and distilling since they seem to produce the exact same result. For my nickel, now that my unprotected Mac prints to the Adobe PDF printer okay, that method is one step shorter than PSing and Distilling. For those who may not have the full version of Acrobat, the exported PDF works fine...it's just a hair fatter than it's PS cousin (but definitely skinnier than me). Rich -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JR Boulay Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PDF-Basics] PDF's from CS PDF-Basics is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com/ __________________________________________________________________ > because this method is NOT a good idea on Mac OS X because of the way > the print architecture works on that system Is there an objective reason to believe your claim ? Otherwise, bear in mind that printers wants top-quality printouts, not necessarily top-quality PDFs... ;-) -- JRB www.abracadabraPDF.net To change your subscription: http://www.pdfzone.com/discussions/lists-pdfbasics.html To change your subscription: http://www.pdfzone.com/discussions/lists-pdfbasics.html
