Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

[Colin Gilham]

For the umpteenth time the subject of PDF-JPEG's suitability as a viable medium for proofing has reared its head again here. For me this discussion always been a non-issue. The only proper method of proofing is post-RIP and this is the most important thing, if it produces larger file sizes that take more creative methods of transmission and all that then so be it, just find a solution.

Thing is, it's not me who needs convincing and when we're up against other systems that spit out a normalised vector PDF as a 'proof' it's difficult to argue the case for PDF-JPEG. The situation is only getting worse and the 'every one else can do it why can't you' comment is being heard more and more.

I need a lot of convincing when it comes to treating anything other than a post-RIP files as a proof but I'm willing to investiagte all avenues, so fellow RAMpagers, do you know of, or are you using, other methods of producing PDF proofs other than PDF-JPEGs, such as:

Different export options?
Creating more 'bulletproof' production PDFs and supplying those as proofs instead. If so how?
Maybe switching to using the NORM workflow and supplying RDMs as proofs? If so any comments?

I've had a look at NORM and it might be the answer even though it means we're missing some key RAMpage features, in particular the prescan/colour mapping functions and I'd like to hear your opinions on NORM:

Why did you switch from ROOM?
Do you use it alongside ROOM?
How you've got around its limitations (additional applicaitons, procedures etc)

All comments are welcome and are valued.

Thanks, Colin

 

[jbbbarr]

Re: Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

I had this issue arise yesterday on a spot color job and to compound the issue is that the pdf-jpegs turn spots to process, unless this is something I am doing wrong, but it just caused more confusion. I basically responded with, now you will have to wait on your hard proof and I will no longer bother with the pdf option since it causes so much confusion.

What's so stupid is that all of the customers will gladly sign off on an inkjet, i guess because it is so pretty.

jb

 

[Colin Gilham]

Re: Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

John

You're doing nothing wrong, PDF-JPEG is CMYK only so all spots are converted. What the client needs to be made aware of is that, although the PDF only contains CMYK, the fact that the colour name appears in the Rampage slugline means the spot was retained when it was RIPed.

Yours is a classic example of where PDF-JPEG simply doesn't cut it, and the option of supplying a hard copy proof instead isn't really a viable alternative.

Colin

 

[jbbbarr]

Re: Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

I did tell the customer tis, but as you have heard, I'm sure, it does not view correctly in seps mode of Acrobat. I have also been contemplating running the norm workflow and submitting these as proofs, just a bit gun-shy of possible errors on the output side. We do work for the state bar here and mistakes would be costly on books that have upwards of 2000 pages. The room workflow has been bullet-proof, it would be impossible for me to explains errors.

 

[Colin Gilham]

Re: Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

Hear hear, John!

So come on everyone, how about some brain storming...how can we give the client the proofs they want without compromising ourselves????

Colin

 

[Bob Weir]

Re: Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

Colin,
Why is Rampage Remote a solution for this problem?
Bob W

 

[michaelejahn]

Re: Alternatives to PDF-JPEG, NORM workflow and life in general...

Hi Colin,

I find the idea that somehow you feel that you can't reliably exchange or reliably proof a PDF file.

I would like to point out that may people testing modern digital printing systems and color proofing systems submit complex PDF files to the vendors.

In particular, Paul Lindstrom distributes a spot color proofing test form kit - and the file is a PDF file.

http://www.digitaldots.org/merchandise/spotproof

Rampage is a fine system. One cannot argue that may of its features help the user 'resolve' and 'flatten' many things - by "pre-processing" things, there is less of a chance for something going wrong.

But then again, so is working strictly in cash. On a small scale, this works.

But when you are making thousands of color transactions a day (or an hour) - well, it is impractical to imagine a Rampage world replacing the "make me a PDF and send it" world - I am sure you know all about PDF/X.

So, in summary

Time Warner requires PDF/X files for submission of ads - they have insisted on this since June 2001. I think the industry has voted that PDF/X can be used for reliable digital document exchange in the printing marketplace - if you are interested in settings;

http://direct2time.timeinc.com/bodyframe.jsp?titleKey=30&subcat=2

Before you say "well, this is just one publisher" (they represent 25% of ALL color ads exchanged world wide)

Take a moment to review information here;

http://www.gwg.org/

hope this helps you on your journey !