question for PDF specialist

[Kees]

Hi,
To enhance the color quality of (on a iGen4) our printed material we are investigating the existing automatic workflow to create pdf. files. Now it appears that we are using a pdf version / setting customized by our supplier (it is not a pdfX3 or so). The attached document contains the settings from the user interface. Is there anything sensible to say about this? I am not that familiar with pdf. settings, indesign, pit stop and all these things, but I do know the theories of color management.
Any comment is welcome!

 

[abc]

It's not really doing that much. It's downsizing resolution and removing any hidden image data.

As you rightly say you are not using a PDF standard so there is no output intent.

There's no color management going on so you are wholly dependent on the native document and how it is created, if you have RGB elements for example these are going to be in the final PDF.

How's it working out for you, are there any issues you are experiencing?

I would not expect this to improve color quality as you are basically printing what you get!

Are you preflighting the final PDF file before printing it?

 

[Kees]

Hi ABC, since you are from Belgium I'm going to sent you a private mail in dutch.

 

[abc]

Thanks, I'm from England living in Gent, but I do have some colleagues who speak Dutch.



You can drop me an email: [email protected] if it's easier

 

[cosmo]

yeah, as mentioned, those settings really dont do much at all, its probably best that they leave it that way, let your rip on the igen do the work.

 

[Dov Isaacs]

The options recommended to you maintain live transparency and keep color in its original color space with ICC profiles.

Our recommendation at Adobe would be to go only one step further and that would be to use the built-in settings, as-is, for PDF/X-4:2010.

All modern RIPs/DFEs used with an iGen4 should be able to handle PDF/X-4 files without any problem. In fact, from what I understand, Xerox itself is now recommending PDF/X-4 for use with its recent-vintage digital printers!

- Dov Isaacs, Principal Scientist, Adobe Systems Incorporated

 

[Puch]

Hi Kees,

These settings will produce a PDF which is very good for 'enhanced quality' work. Not limited/tied to any color spaces, it can be ripped directly into the printers's color space, producing the widest color/dynamic range. Today's RIPs with APPE will flatten them perfectly, no need to sweat.

 

[rich apollo]

Page 1 - you could turn off "Created Tagged PDF". This is for use with assistive devices.

Page 2 - I'm not a fan of JPEG compression for print, but that's my opinion and experience. JPEG 2000 is not universally supported, but since your print vendor is recommending the setting, then they obviously can accept it.

Page 3 - I would turn on "Use Document Bleed Settings." As this is set up, you're not including bleed at all. That is an instance of Capital Prepress Crime, punishable by very bad things - very, very bad things.

Page 4 - This is how I like to set PDFs up. It tags elements, but doesn't change anything. InDesign's color management controls are not to my taste, so I prefer to avoid them.

Page 5 - The font embedding threshold in this pane is an attempt to get fonts to embed in their entirety. There is a preference that must also be set, or subsetting will still occur.

 

[gig0]

I'm not a fan of JPEG compression for print

FYI, Gordo pretty much confirmed what some of us suspected; jpeg format isn't all that evil. The Print Guide: JPEG images for print production - the facts

 

[Dov Isaacs]

@Rich:

I would agree wrt/ tagged PDF. However it is also useful for those awful situations where one is forced to save as Word from Acrobat.

The Compression Automatic (JPEG) / Image Quality Maximum really represents the best of both worlds. What most users don't know is that the “automatic” aspect of this compression mode is that InDesign examines each image prior to compression and for images representing vector-like content, lossless ZIP compression is used to avoid any artifacts at all and to optimize compression. JPEG compression is only used for compression of photographic type images for which such compression causes the least if any perceptible quality loss.

We recommend these color settings as well. If what you mean by InDesign's color management controls not being to your taste is that you somehow feel that other software does a better job in converting from original tagged color space to final destination, fine, I won't argue with you. To each his own although quite frankly, Adobe's color management conversions comply completely with the ICC specification with no secret sauce. If you advocate turning off InDesign's color management completely, we could not disagree more.

With regards to font embedding, there is absolutely no way to force InDesign to fully embed any arbitrary font within an exported PDF (or even EPS) file, regardless of any settings in preferences or this export options pane; i.e., it will work for some but not all fonts!! And quite frankly, there is no good reason that we know of to fully embed a font unless you own stock in Seagate or Western Digital (or perhaps Maxtor or SanDisk for SSDs). Full font embedding does not enable PDF text editing in Acrobat Pro or (not recommended) Illustrator without the font being installed on the user's system. And contrary to industry bubbameises, neither subset embedding nor full embedding yields a PDF that is somehow more reliable for rendering.

Again, our recommendation is PDF/X-4 which is one notch above the originally provided specifications and that we as both developers of the applications in question and the Adobe PDF Print Engine believe to provide the most reliable and consistent PDF print publishing workflow.

- Dov

 

[Stephen Marsh]

We recommend these color settings as well. If what you mean by InDesign's color management controls not being to your taste is that you somehow feel that other software does a better job in converting from original tagged color space to final destination, fine, I won't argue with you. To each his own although quite frankly, Adobe's color management conversions comply completely with the ICC specification with no secret sauce. If you advocate turning off InDesign’s color management completely, we could not disagree more.

- Dov

Dov, I agree with Rich.

http://printplanet.com/forums/color-management/33608-converting-destination-id

I much prefer the precise control that Acrobat Pro Convert Color provides over the “one size fits all” approach of InDesign colour conversions.

InDesign does not offer the very necessary “Preserve” options (black, primaries, promote gray).

InDesign does not offer conversion based on object type or colour space filtering, nor min/max font size.

In the right hands, Acrobat Pro convert colors is a surgeon’s scalpel, while InDesign colour conversion is a hatchet.


Stephen Marsh

 

[Kees]

Thanks to all of you for taking the time to respond! Very helpful!
Kees

 

[rich apollo]

I've been in situations in which JPEG compression has left noticeable artifacts in the printed product. It is my own preference to simply avoid it.

Stephen hit upon why I don't like to use InDesign's color management for conversions. There are a couple of controls I feel are important, that InDesign doesn't have.

As to font embedding, PitStop will allow you to edit text with embedded characters. So, getting the whole font can be useful. Unfortunately, an embedded subset of a font only includes the characters used. It would be cool if subsets could include all glyphs from the language of the document.

 

[Dov Isaacs]

Dov, I agree with Rich.

http://printplanet.com/forums/color-management/33608-converting-destination-id

I much prefer the precise control that Acrobat Pro Convert Color provides over the “one size fits all” approach of InDesign colour conversions.

InDesign does not offer the very necessary “Preserve” options (black, primaries, promote gray).

InDesign does not offer conversion based on object type or colour space filtering, nor min/max font size.

In the right hands, Acrobat Pro convert colors is a surgeon’s scalpel, while InDesign colour conversion is a hatchet.


Stephen Marsh

Stephen,

I won't argue that Acrobat gives much finer control over color conversion than InDesign.

The original premise of my response is that you should not have InDesign convert any colors in your content. For properly-prepared content where objects are tagged with ICC profiles, conversion to the final color space should occur when the content is rendered, which in the case of printing is at the RIP or DFE or perhaps even on-screen with a soft proofer. Such RIPs/DFEs/soft proofers pretty much all provide the various knobs and dials necessary for handling black point compensation, promotion of primaries (especially black) in CMYK=>C'M'Y'K' conversions, and promotion of R=G=B grayscale (common in Orifice applications and amateur use of Photoshop) to CMYK (0,0,0,K). Other secret sauce is also provided.

- Dov

 

[dabob]

Dov . . .

"With regards to font embedding, there is absolutely no way to force InDesign to fully embed any arbitrary font within an exported PDF (or even EPS) file, regardless of any settings in preferences or this export options pane; i.e., it will work for some but not all fonts!! And quite frankly, there is no good reason that we know of to fully embed a font unless you own stock in Seagate or Western Digital (or perhaps Maxtor or SanDisk for SSDs). Full font embedding does not enable PDF text editing in Acrobat Pro or (not recommended) Illustrator without the font being installed on the user's system. And contrary to industry bubbameises, neither subset embedding nor full embedding yields a PDF that is somehow more reliable for rendering."

We are using OPS online ordering system and the fonts need to be fully embedded in the master pdf so that the customer can input the information they need into the fields and have the fonts come out correctly . . . so I sometimes wish for an easy option to fully embed a font.

 

[Dov Isaacs]

I've been in situations in which JPEG compression has left noticeable artifacts in the printed product. It is my own preference to simply avoid it.

Stephen hit upon why I don't like to use InDesign's color management for conversions. There are a couple of controls I feel are important, that InDesign doesn't have.

As to font embedding, PitStop will allow you to edit text with embedded characters. So, getting the whole font can be useful. Unfortunately, an embedded subset of a font only includes the characters used. It would be cool if subsets could include all glyphs from the language of the document.

I agree about noticeable artifacts for JPEG compression, but at least in my experience, it has been only in imagery that should never have been JPEG-compressed in the first place, such as images of what is effectively vector artwork at relatively low resolution (I keep a bunch of such samples around). I don't see it in relatively high resolution photographic images that are JPEG-compressed.

In terms of InDesign's color management, again the idea is to use workflows in which InDesign is not converting colors. For most content, placing such content in InDesign and exporting PDF with the content in its original color space with a profile and letting the RIP/DFE/soft proofer handle it is a much better option. And yes, for certain exceptionally color-critical work, doing color conversion earlier (i.e., prior to placement into InDesign) may be necessary, but the vast majority of content that is printed simply doesn't need that.

With regards to PitStop allowing editing of text with the glyphs in the font(s) already embedded in the PDF file, as far as I understand, PitStop only allows this for fonts for which the fsType table allows editable embedability. Most commercial fonts simply do not allow this. Furthermore, even when one thinks that they have embedded a complete font, they really haven't, whether it is Type 1, TrueType, or OpenType (or either flavor). Only the glyphs, advance widths, and some additional metrics are embedded. The various font metrics that allow for pair kerning, small caps, ligatures, etc. are not included in what is embedded. The only way to do that is to fully-embed an OpenType font, a feature which is not at all available from InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop, etc. (and as far as I know, from PitStop or Call pdfToolbox, etc. as well). That makes high quality editing using an embedded font nearly impossible. Oh, and by the way, even if it isn't enforced by applications or PitStop, many font EULAs (End User License Agreements) require that only subset-embedding is permitted.

- Dov

 

[Dov Isaacs]

Dov . . .

"With regards to font embedding, there is absolutely no way to force InDesign to fully embed any arbitrary font within an exported PDF (or even EPS) file, regardless of any settings in preferences or this export options pane; i.e., it will work for some but not all fonts!! And quite frankly, there is no good reason that we know of to fully embed a font unless you own stock in Seagate or Western Digital (or perhaps Maxtor or SanDisk for SSDs). Full font embedding does not enable PDF text editing in Acrobat Pro or (not recommended) Illustrator without the font being installed on the user's system. And contrary to industry bubbameises, neither subset embedding nor full embedding yields a PDF that is somehow more reliable for rendering."

We are using OPS online ordering system and the fonts need to be fully embedded in the master pdf so that the customer can input the information they need into the fields and have the fonts come out correctly . . . so I sometimes wish for an easy option to fully embed a font.

Actually, Acrobat Pro does allow for absolutely full font embedding for PDF forms if and only if the font is one for which we can ascertain that the EULA and the font vendor allow use of the font for this purpose. This includes a subset of Adobe's font library.

- Dov

 

[dabob]

Thanks Dov . . . din't know that - could help solve a lot of problems

 

[leonardr]

Actually, Acrobat Pro does allow for absolutely full font embedding for PDF forms if and only if the font is one for which we can ascertain that the EULA and the font vendor allow use of the font for this purpose. This includes a subset of Adobe's font library.

To extend on what my esteemed colleague has said...

It should also be noted that even when a font is "fully embedded" - that ONLY applies to the glyphs themselves. There is ZERO requirement to embed font information that is used strictly at layout time - such as kerning tables, OpenType layout information. For that, you would need to do a SPECIAL TYPE of font embedding, where the ENTIRE FONT is embedded. Adobe Acrobat will only do this in one specific case - when the font is used as the font of a form field - because in that case, it knows you are going to be using it for data entry & edit.

 

[RAMSA-GRAPHICS]

I have "exceptionally color-critical work" which contains both vector and raster imagery. We use the full Adobe CC design suite, and print to either a Fiery RIP or Fiery XF RIP with totally expected results. The only unexpected result is due to user error upstream.

We work regularly with color management experts at Adobe, EFI, and Xerox. I have only interacted with Dov on a few occasions via this forum, but I see him as an expert in this field and would follow his directions.