XMF imposition problem

[Perryt]

Has anybody noticed a difference when viewing between document mode and rendered mode? We have had this issue occur on two seperate occassions, where the document view is correct, but changes when rendered which results in the output being incorrect.

We have resolved the issue by retrying plates.

We are running XMF V2.5

[mrslick26]

Has anybody noticed a difference when viewing between document mode and rendered mode? We have had this issue occur on two seperate occassions, where the document view is correct, but changes when rendered which results in the output being incorrect.

We have resolved the issue by retrying plates.

We are running XMF V2.5

Hi, we have had the same problem.

[frailer]

Are you saying that the procedure of viewing Rendered Mode actually CAUSES an error in output? When you say it changes...in what way? I'd really like to know, so as to watch out for it myself, but would love some more detail.
In theory, I would have thought, viewing Rendered is just pulling up the plate/screened file for you to view. Can't see how it would change the way a file has already been rendered. Just saying....
There are a few odd little things that hopefully they'll resolve in v3, which is a little...ahem...delayed. One of them is not being able to cancel queued plates. Not a show-stopper; just annoying.

[Perryt]

Hi
The problem is that we have been using the documnet mode for a quick check prior to proofing, and then have realised that the proof output has been different from the docuemnt mode view. Pages seem to move randomely within the imposition. We have noticed that every time the errror has occured (twice so far), we have used a modified impostion template (changing from perfect binding to saddle stich) and not created a new template.

The proof has always matched the rendered view.

This has been our only issue with XMF so far, other than pdf artwork supplied in older versions of acrobat which the RIP will not parse.

[frailer]

Seems you may have homed in on the possible cause. Must admit I have not, to memory, modified a saddle to perfect, or vice versa, from the drop-down in the Assembly Sections window. Have always used that in the process of creating a Stripping Sheet Template, as an 'up-front' step. Maybe that's a big ask of XMF to try and alter binding style on an existing Template. There may be specific parameters in place for that style that sends things off the rails when you change styles further down-track.
Having said that, I can't say whether it's written in the documentation as to whether you can or not.
I sure won't be trying it now though! Forewarned...

Addit: My compadre was having trouble sometimes, where he thought he was bringing in SSTempl sheets, but they would split in Assembly Sections, thus giving him non-saddle page-flow. The only thing I could suggest was that he recreate any SSTs that were giving him grief, from scratch. He's not big on feedback, but I haven't heard any cussin' since. Could be similar issue.