any xerox 700 users?

[Fontaholic]

To the person who got an additional "artifact" on their DCP700 output --

Under the "Image" selections/options in "Job Properties" in Command Workstation, did you have anything selected other than "Normal", or did you have "Apply Image Enhancement" selected?

I ask because a similar thing happened to me about a year ago, and I had either something changed from "Normal" to "Best" or that "Apply Image Enhancement" on.

The resulting piece had a weird artifact (an enlongated triangle) on the topmost of the two-up image I was running, and this wasn't caught until partway through the folding and boxing process. 

We begged our boss (who was doing the folding) to let me re-run all of the pieces he'd already folded and boxed, but he wouldn't hear of it.  And sure enough, either the customer got one in the mail with that weird triangle, or the mailhouse ratted us out -- not sure which.

In either case, the customer wanted a refund on the job AND this resulted in their pulling most of their work from us... 

And guess who got the blame for all this?    I told the higher-ups that I'd take responsibility for not catching the the artifact while the job was running, but that I wasn't going to take the blame for the customer being pissed, because I and another employee had both pleaded for the job not to go out the way it was, but we were overruled.  I still caught hell, but stood my ground.

Ever since that incident, I haven't used any of those enhancement features on the DCP700...

[David]

thanks, good to know!

[gnubler]

on the topmost of the two-up image

Are you saying you imposed in CWS? As I typed a few posts ago, my Creo RIP does weird things involving transparency when I use the in-RIP impo. If I run it 1-up it's fine. 

[Sabrina The Turd Polisher]

on the topmost of the two-up image

Are you saying you imposed in CWS? As I typed a few posts ago, my Creo RIP does weird things involving transparency when I use the in-RIP impo. If I run it 1-up it's fine. 

I second that question...did you use an impose feature?

good info tho about the normal vs. best...have to do some T&E and find out...

[Slappy]

We've seen a few oddities on the XC1000 when imposing in CWS. I can't say for sure if we've had anything that strange, but there are definitely some shenanigans going on with their Impose Tool. If I think of it, I'll ask our Operator if he ever got any resolution from Xerox on the problems.

[Fontaholic]

Are you saying you imposed in CWS? As I typed a few posts ago, my Creo RIP does weird things involving transparency when I use the in-RIP impo. If I run it 1-up it's fine. 

I just double-checked and no -- I had imposed the job two-up in InDesign before ripping a highest-quality PDF from the imposed file.

Because my boss was initially too tight to spring for the imposition dongle, I had to manually impose most of our InDesign jobs that required impositions...  :rolleyes:

Cheers, John

[Fontaholic]

I second that question...did you use an impose feature?

good info tho about the normal vs. best...have to do some T&E and find out...

Nope, I did not use the CWS impose feature.  I manually imposed the job in InDesign before creating a highest-quality PDF from said InDesign file.

This was the first -- and to date, last -- time that I ever got this weird artifact through some combination of the "best" / "improved" features, and after getting my ass burned, I've never tried them again.

This file from hell originally began life as a Publisher file, and had gradients in it, so I have to wonder if that was where the problem originated?  But then again, when I put all the CSW settings back to normal, the artifact disappeared... 

So if in your experimentations you are able to recreate this glitch, I'd be happy to know what NOT to do in the future! 

Cheers, John

[gnubler]

This file from hell originally began life as a Publisher file, and had gradients in it, so I have to wonder if that was where the problem originated? 

Doubt it. Microsoft makes solid, professional graphic software that never really causes problems in commercial printing. I blame prepress.  :laugh:

[Joe]

This file from hell originally began life as a Publisher file, and had gradients in it, so I have to wonder if that was where the problem originated? 

Doubt it. Microsoft makes solid, professional graphic software that never really causes problems in commercial printing. I blame prepress.  :laugh:

All the cool kids use it.

[andyfest]

This file from hell originally began life as a Publisher file, and had gradients in it, so I have to wonder if that was where the problem originated? 

Doubt it. Microsoft makes solid, professional graphic software that never really causes problems in commercial printing. I blame prepress.  :laugh:

All the hip kids use it.

Fixed

[David]

I use it too!

[gnubler]

All the cool kids use it.

No they don't, they use "Adobe".  :laugh:

[andyfest]

They use mud bricks?! Kids these days....

[gnubler]

They learn it here.

[Sabrina The Turd Polisher]

There may be a better thread to post this question, but here goes...

Has anyone here had issues with a Fiery losing it's networking capabilities?
Our Fiery can't see the network, therefore the folder we use to put digital jobs into...
This has happened 4 times in a week. Never happened before?
A cold boot fixes the problem. However, operator is saying after a cold boot today, it's still not seeing network.