The PDF list is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com __________________________________________________________________
Gray
__________________________________________________________________But this implies that the receiver side needs a correct tool to output PDF 1.5 files.
Now for the rest of the issue. This client insists on making a ps and
distilling in Distiller 6. However he make the compatibility to Acrobat 4
(1.3). His pdf looks like it has lost some of the transparency. Doesn't
the file lose some of its information when it is made compatible to Acrobat
4?
Acrobat Distiller 6 does a fine job making PDFs. The difference between making PDFs directly from InDesign and rendering PostScript from InDesign and then distilling is that there are many more choices open to the customer when creating PostScript and distilling, and this increases a greater possibility of making errors.
Some times I see the PDF as a "digital Film" and this sould show how the result will be and not what the result should look like if the receiver side has a rip that can correctly handle PDF 1.5 files with transparencies.
That is for sure right to a certain degree. I also would not say that InDesign makes a poor "PDF". I would rather say that when using InDesign 2.02 the most relyable way to get a PDF for printing you better go via Distiller So you can be sure that only elements that go through a PostScript Interpreter is in the PDF.
Logic should tell us that the fewer the number of conversions or transformations in a process, especially one so open to misinterpretation as prepress, the less likely the chance for an error to occur. You should try to get your customer to agree with this logic. The folklore that "InDesign makes poor PDF" is not true.
I heared the specially the libraries to correctly flatten PDF's are to a certain degree "rewritten" in the new CS Versions.
In case further convincing is required: when InDesign creates PostScript, all transparency is resolved or "flattened" using exactly the same software algorithms as when exporting to PDF 1.3. There is no notion of transparency in PostScript like there is in PDF 1.4 or 1.5 (Acrobat 5 and 6). Therefore, whether InDesign is writing PostScript or exporting to PDF 1.3, the result will be essentially the same, excepting extra features in PDF which have nothing to do with > printing.
see above.
All the customer is doing when going the Distiller route is a) wasting time and b) opening up the possibility of operator error far wider than if they had exported direct.
When generating PDF/X files, that are based in the PDF 1.3 Standard, you can be sure that only elements that can be printed are in the PDF. If seome wants to preserve transparencies, then the only way is the PDF Export - but be aware of the problems that could arise when this PDf goes directly in a RIP - assuming the PDF's are intended for printing
Good questions, though. InDdesign CS, by the way, exports to the PDF/X standard format that may inspire more confidence on the part of your client in the future.
best regards/mit freundlichen Gru:ssen
Gary Cosimini Adobe Systems Inc.
Inpetto - Peter Kleinheider PrePress Consultant & Workflow Programming St. Po:ltnerstr. 26 3130 Herzogenburg AUSTRIA ________________________________ Mobil: +43/650/2600099 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your subscription: http://www.pdfzone.com/discussions/lists-pdf.html
