PDFs with transparent objects

[marktonk]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

Hi tech,

Our current version Prinect Printready and MetaDimension accept PDF 1.7. So does our Prinect Trap Editor and Prinect Color Editor. We actually prefer the layered PDF because it provides more options for the user to get optimum results.

Regards,

Mark Tonkovich
Heidelberg USA
Product Manager, CtP & Proofing

 

[gig0]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

Gregg,

With the Brisque, all the PDFs got flattened one way or another. We preferred to flatten the file ourselves since this would give us a few more options, depending on the design, which areas would need to be rasterized. Some cases, it was the whole page.

Now that we've moved on to Prinergy 4, transparencies are a non-issue and prefer unflattened PDFs as well. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some PDFs get rejected because they're flattened.

 

[Ritchie]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

Dov

Thanks very much for your definition of "live transparency".
I completely understand your explanation for this is indeed what I understood transparent items to be, however I was rather interested in why these items are called +'Live'+ transparency as apposed to just +'Transparency'+

Many thanks
Ritchie

 

[Dov Isaacs]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

It is called +live+ transparency because the objects in PDF still have the transparency attributes and are effectively editable pretty much in their original context as opposed to +flattened+ transparency in which the original context and objects are replaced by opaque objects (often many more in quantity) simulating the original objects with live transparency. Alternatively, we could have referred to +flattened+ transparency as *+dead transparency+* which is what it is as far as those of us regard it! :8}

- Dov

 

[Ritchie]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

Superb Dov, thanks for that. I now fully understand.

 

[cosmo]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

One of our rips is a harlequin rip, and I used to only want 1.3 version flattened PDF's, but I found it produced much better results accepting the "Live Transparency" files (up to 1.6) and letting the rip handle it, it takes a lot longer to rip, but there is way less fragmenting around the edges of shadows etc that you get from flattening first, also, the anoying text fattening on the edge of the shadows. We also have a Creo RIP supposed to handle 1.6, this does a terrible job of it, I need to flatten first.

 

[Andy]

Re: PDFs with transparent objects

I think that last post clearly backs up what's been said before - upgrade to the latest RIP (be-it Hqn or otherwise) and you're more likely to be able to output jobs that in earlier RIPs cause problems.

Current apps do make heavier use of PDF, so it's worth anyone with earlier versions of Hqn RIP who are using PDF upgrading.

Later Hqn RIP releases are also faster (on some jobs I tried, quite a bit too).

Personally, if I wanted to RIP using a Hqn RIP, my thinking would be that version 4 is well old, version 5 getting there, version 6 fine, version 7 what I'd want and version 8 would be nice to have - all depending on budget.

One thing for people to be aware of - live transparency in the Hqn RIP can be a memory hog, especially at high resolutions. If memory runs out, it then puts data out to disk, which slows it down a lot. Avoid that, and it 'aint too bad. The recommendation - stick as much memory in your RIP PC as you can if you RIP lots of live transparency, especially at higher resolutions (2400 or so). Ideally 4Gig, so you can give the RIP 2Gig and the OS 2Gig (for file caching).

Memory is so cheap these days, that any RIP machine should have 2 Gig and 4 if possible (and not too expensive - depends on how many SIMMs your PC can take).

PS Can't resist one little comment in reply to Dov... The Harlequin RIP had native PDF interpretation ever since day 1 when it released it's first PDF RIP (which was an addition to it's PS RIP) - I know, 'cause I coded a lot of it. So anyone using Hqn RIPs has never had a problem with "stink'in PostScript intermediaries". So nice to see that Adobe finally caught up with Harlequin, about 10 years later though. The question now though is... when will Adobe add native XPS interpretation like the Harlequin RIP has. I don't think anyone quite knows where XPS is going to end up, but the Harlequin RIP having it already certainly can't hurt.

Regards,

Andy.

Andy Cave,
Chief Executive Officer,
Hamillroad Software Limited.
www.firstproof.com
www.hamillroad.com