Using TIFF & EPS versus AI & PSD

[Laurens]

I've never been a big fan of using proprietary file formats but there are obvious advantages to placing AI and PSD files in an Indy page instead of using EPS and TIFF. When Adobe added direct support for application file formats to InDesign, there were obvious bugs and I told people to stick to the know formats that worked so well in the past.

I have no idea how reliable the use of AI and PSD is in CS2 or CS3.

Go with the flow or stick to the classics?

[30YearsandCounting]

I too was skeptical at the beginning.  But, I have to say it does seem to work well.   

[rrobinson]

It seems Adobe is forcing the issue somewhat with the 'white bounding box' preview for EPS files. Attempting to find a resolution online to this the answer is to use the native .ai format. Skeptical myself but the multitude of customer ID files that come in using native formats seem to process with no problems.

[doubting_thomas]

I use .psd and .ai all the time and don't have any issues. Been doing it
since I loaded CS2 a few years ago.

[David]

skeptical here as well when I first started using .ai and .psd files.

but, I have found that in my workflow (Esko Scope V3, soon to be Suite 7)), they work great and I haven't had any real problems using them.


I've actually gotten to where I would rather use an .ai or .psd than anything else.

[WharfRat]

For the folks that are using .ai and .psd files With InDesign ...
I would suggest
looking into PDF files from those applications.
That is the current Adobe workflow and will be the workflow of the future.
PDF is the only way to retain bleed, placeable layers and crop marx with Illustrator.
Photoshop PDF (.pdp) is the ONLY way to retain round trippable vector files with Photoshop.
For two years now, I have not used any Adobe files other than .pdf/.pdp - and .indd, of course (well - almost).

MSD

[Laurens]

I doubt there is much difference between AI and PDF - technically any AI file since Illustrator 9 is really a PDF with some additional metadata in it. The outside packing may look different but internally AI and PDF will be more or less the same. I'll try to digg up the article that an Adobe guy wrote on this.

I have never considered using PDF for Photoshop data. Interesting idea! Any downsides or differences in the way InDesign provides access to stuff like layers or masks?

[Joe]

Vector data in a Photoshop PDF (or any file type) sucks and is a RIP hog! Why anyone would use Photoshop to set type or high res vector graphics is beyond me. Used to have a customer that did his whole mag in Photoshop. He was so proud of himself. Took an hour and a half to RIP each page. Finally just did not have time so we rasterized every page to get it through the RIP in our current lifetime. Glad he left us to torment some other printer.

[beermonster]

i use ai files and psd files all the time - all day every day - i have absolutely no issues whatsoever. i prefer them.

i prefer, if possible, not to link ai files - again not always possible, but copy paste between them, if you are careful, works a dream, and avoids possible issues with a link. well - it works well for us here. another reason is a linked ai file or an eps will not, i believe, get trapped if you use indesign's built in trapping. packaging here and you need to be a trapping nerd sadly.

pdf's are great in indy, if they are good pdf's anyway. add the trap and man life is good! until the board expands and we have to zonal trap - but thats another story for another time

psd files - the only real downside is they can create huge files. flexibility with files is paramount here, and layered psd files give me all the opportunites i need to correct stuff if needed. if i have a huge layered file i will sometimes eps or tiff it (still retaining the original layered file though), rename and re-import (damm that transparency is handy to help get position) occasionally - again works just fine. luckily enough, i cant recall receiving psd <or any photoshop> files with vectors included - i have heard tales of woe from folks receiving files like that - i'm just lucky i guess

so if you want ultimate flexibility in your files - psd and ia
if you receive only "press ready" files <ya lucky bugger> and refuse to make changes and stuff - tiffs and eps are fine.

if i need to alter any layers in say a psd file or an ai file i'll do it in the appropriate package as opposed to having a bash through indy. but thats just the way i work

[almaink]

A little tip for trapping ai files in Indy. After you place the ai's Export the file to PDF and reimport that PDF into InDesign. Now set your trap parameters and rip the PDF. Your Ai's now will be trapped. This method also will reduce rip times as the PDF can be compressed and those large layered psd's are no longer an issue either.

[beermonster]

cunning in it's simplicity - i like it

since i find that a universal trap (a-la- assign your trap in indy) can sometimes bee too much on smaller objects i tend to trap my illy files in illy manually - i'm lucky i have the time to i guess, and depending on the complexity of the overall project when its all bought together in indy dictates if i can trap the indy stuff manually or with an assign trap.

its a judgement call per job really

personally speaking, we've had good results with indy's trapping

[ninjaPB_43]

Glad he left us to torment some other printer.

I think he came to us..   


I prefer .ai and .psd as well..  its easier when designing also because I am saving the pieces as natives while working on them anyway, no need to save as a different format for linking to the .indd layout..

[Laurens]

Thanks for everyone's feedback. I guess I'll have to rethink my InDesign habits!

I am still interested in hearing about the pitfalls of using PSD or AI. I can imagine that people whose workflow can't cope with transparency may prefer to stick to EPS and TIFF to make sure flattening happens upfront in the production chain. I also wonder how easy it will be to open such a job with AI and PSD files in it in 10 years time. I can still rework files that I created in QuarkXPress 3.11 but the more proprietary file formats you use, the trickier this gets.

I've added a link to this thread on this page.

You can vote for your favorite way of working here.

[MonkeyBoy]

I first HATED using .psd files in Indy. Back in the days of Indy2.0. CS1 made it much better but our workflow at the time still had some issues. Mainly having transparency issues and unreliable output.
Since then we've updated our rip a few times and of course are up to CS2 & CS3. They don't cause issues anymore for us. I prefer using .psd files vs eps files. I'm happy still using Tiffs though. As for .ai files, to be honest I still prefer .eps. I think I got bit one too many times in the past by doing this. When working with .eps files from illy into InDesign, I often just turn it on high resolution preview to see the transparency. Admittedly this slows it down but I only need it on every so often to make sure it imported correctly.
So with the poll I have to admit I'd vote for .psd/.eps which isn't an option. Call me the black sheep of the group.

[T]

It seems Adobe is forcing the issue somewhat with the 'white bounding box' preview for EPS files. Attempting to find a resolution online to this the answer is to use the native .ai format. Skeptical myself but the multitude of customer ID files that come in using native formats seem to process with no problems.

Just view the file at the max res...

Menu -> View -> Display Performance -> High Quality Display