Standards for technical / profile detail on PDFs for packaging

[JohnMcGrath]

I tried searching the forum for on this topic before posting so if it is a rehash I apologise.


I am aware that the GWG -Packaging subcommittee are working but I have not seen much in regards documented standards on this and thought I would ask here.

When being supplied a PDF file are there any structured approaches to supplying the technical profiles for things such as perforations, braille, diecutting, creasing, etc. I have seen supplied PDFs that span the spectrum from no profile details to overkill with multiple layers for technical details.

Any best practices, documentation or pointers would be great.

Thanks in Advance, John

 

[abc]

Hi John

The GWG have been quite busy. The Processing Steps specification that the Packaging Sub-Committee have been working on is actually in the throes of becoming an ISO specification.

That's the only relevant standard I am aware of.

ISO 19593 - Use of PDF to associate processing steps and content data.
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=65428

You might find the attached white paper interesting

 

[JohnMcGrath]

Hi Andrew, Thanks for your reply, I have been reading about GWG's work from some of their presentations online. The problem is getting a few good examples of this. The white paper you attached does go into more detail than I had previously thanks. The ISO paper is, as of yet, not approved and does not appear to be available for download. Are you aware of any early implementers in this area.

 

[abc]

The ISO specification is not final John. It's still being discussed and reviewed. With a fair wind you might see it published in 2016.

I expect to see some implementations at Drupa, that's probably the earliest.

If you have any specific questions or queries you can always drop me a mail, I can always get one of the Packaging sub-committee chairs to talk to you if necessary.

 

[Stephen Marsh]

John, ABC has used some packaging examples in recent PitStop Pro webinars, attached are a couple of screen grabs showing the use of “Optional Content Groups” or layers.

Keep in mind that “true” OCG are not the same as “layers” created in say Illustrator and saved as PDF (which also show up as “layers”)… Yes, Adobe have needlessly made this confusing by using the same word to mean two different things!


Stephen Marsh

 

[JohnMcGrath]

Thanks Stephen, I have looked at a few of the GWG presentations on this topic. There are 2 main issues I need to get a better understanding of:
1. If OCG's are not layers per se, howand where are they created?
2. Is there a road map of what a standard OCG should contain including: naming conventions, position in the OCG heirarchy, representative colour, line style(dashed, solid, etc)?

I am just dipping my toe into the water at the minute with this topic but I haven't seen any technical papers or tutorials as of yet.

Regards,

John

 

[Stephen Marsh]

1. If OCG's are not layers per se, howand where are they created?

We all know what layers are in Photoshop, Illustrator or InDesign. They allow us to stack objects on the “Z” order, in addition to stacking order (forward, backward etc). If we wish to have text sitting above a box, we can isolate the text and put the text in a layer that sits above the box. This is “physical” layering (to invent a term).

I have attached a PDF file “LAYERS.pdf”, the layers are “physical” layers in Illustrator, when saving the AI file as PDF I selected the “create Acrobat layers…” option using the existing top level source layers in the PDF exactly as they were in the Illustrator file. Note the layering/stacking order of the objects… For example, the text layer is above the image layer, so the text logically sits on top of the image.

Carefully compare to the “OCG.pdf” file. This file was originally flat/single layer from Illustrator. The OCG was created in Acrobat using PitStop Pro, although Acrobat Pro can also do this too. Note that the images layer is above the text layer, however the text is rendered above the image – not under it! The OCG is not a “physical/stacking layer”, it is content based.

Then take a look at the file “LAYERS-x2.pdf”, it looks and behaves the same way as in Illustrator (apart from “Z” order), the upper and lower layers have a random mix of content as the layers are not being used to “filter content display”.

OCG are not layers in the same sense as found in authoring software, think of OCG as “content filters” that can hide/show/isolate different content without affecting the “Z” order of objects. Even though Acrobat titles OCG as “Layers” for the average user to better understand, they do not really behave the same way.

An analogy is that the Acrobat OCG is similar to a database query, it is just a way to include/exclude certain data from the current view or processing step.

Clear as mud?


Stephen Marsh

 

[JohnMcGrath]

Stephen, thanks for the detailed explanation, I will have to poke around and look into those files in more detail later today.