Not sure why I'm having so much trouble with color conversions. Think I have it - and "poof" all understanding disappears!

We are having a difference if RGB to CMYK if converted in InDesign or converted in Acrobat PitStop.

I apologize up front if not ok to post to more than one Forum.  :undecided:

Adobe US Web Coated (SWOP) color settings - used in InDesign and Acrobat

RGB Mix in Original InDesign file R=87, G-154, B=88

InDesign converts to C=70 M=10 Y=84 K=3

PitStop is set to pick up color management from Acrobat. Acrobat is using the same color settings as InDesign synced with Bridge.

Acrobat PitStop converts to C=82.51 M=3.37 Y=86.67 K=6.89

One difference I know is InDesign uses Adobe CMM color engine. PitStop uses Little CMS. Would this make that much difference?

In case this may be helpful to anyone else . . . I think we have solved the problem. It seems when Prinergy actually "talks" to the proofer front ends is when everything locks and we need to reboot. So we created a HOLD folder into which we print the Prinergy proofs and then manually drag them into the correct output folder on the proofer front end. Seems to have solved the problem.

I talked to XMF hoping they would have an idea of what might be causing this. They came up with a virus program might be causing it. And when opening a window to see what's happening to a file, the act of the thumbnail being created may lock the file.

We have both a Prinergy Workflow and an XMF Workflow. If we send a proof from XMF to the Spinjet, the hot folders no longer function for Prinergy proofs and we need to reboot the proofer front end.

The output files are going to different hot folders on the Spinjet. Prinergy sends a PDF and XMF sends a TIFF (the reason for different hot folders).

Has anyone else seen this and solved this problem?

Thank you!

After doing some testing, this is what we have found works for us. And seems to work well with borders close to the trim.

In the Default Creep, enter the paper thickness X 2 (negative number). Put this in XMF and find the Total Creep value.

In the Initial Creep, enter 1/5 the Total Creep (positive number) (we will modify this as we learn more). Default Creep remains the same.

The Total Creep seems to stay the same no matter what the Initial Creep is.

And we always have horizontal scaling turned on.

It seems strange that we need to double the paper thickness.

What we're finding in our testing.

We have to double the paper thickness to get near the creep measured on a mockup. This is when we are creeping in only.

But it doesn't work perfectly.

We're finding if starting with a mockup it is closer if we divide by 2 (instead of 4).

Does this seem to be true for anyone else?

Yes. Other companies I have worked with have always creeped in. But this company really believes in the creep out / creep in method. 

So we trying to figure out how to make XMF do what we want. Had a Rep out here and thought we had it, but in practice it's not working well.

We have a repeating job (and others) that are 128 pagers (or somewhere close to this), saddle-stitch. It needs enough creep that the inside pages get a little extra small.

With paper thickness at .007in the total creep comes to .217in. 

We divide this by 2 and put the .1085 into the Initial Creep. This forces the outside to start at a push-out distance of half the creep. The inside pagers show that they creep in .1085in, so it appears to work.

All of this seems logical, but in reality we didn't get enough creep.

On larger books we creep half the book out and half the book in.

What we thought would work is figure the full amount of creep, divided in half and set this as the Initial Creep.

Enter the paper thickness into the Default Creep.

But it doesn't seem to be enough creep.

Anyone else doing this?

I don't see any Slur Targets in the Dynamic Marks. Am I just missing them?

I don't think this is what I'm looking for. 

The marks work great. It's just that they need to be at the tail for some jobs, at the center for some jobs, and at the gripper for some jobs.

We're just wanting them to move together.

Thank you.

We're hoping to create this as a grouped mark (if there is such a thing).
Slur Targets on left and right side of color bar. The group will resize to whatever paper size we are using.

We've got the marks to work - as 3 separate marks. I would like them to move together, such as by default we put them at the top of the sheet, but often they need to be in the center of the sheet.

I talked to XMF and they said they didn't have a grouping action. But I thought maybe one of the geniuses on this forum would know how to do this!

I talked to our XMF rep and he was fantastic! He created a workflow that works perfectly. It watches a hot folder, waits until it has a set number of files, creates a job and processes. Waits for the next set number of files, creates a new job, and processes.

Is anyone using XMF to accept files from a Web Portal into a Hot Folder, then directly to plate?

Our problem is, the files come in sporadically and we need to plate before all are received. 

I've tried setting up a Job Template, it made a job out of every single file uploaded.

I've tried creating a Job that will Auto Flow, but whenever we set to Complete so we can plate, the Auto Flow turns off and we'll probably forget to turn it back on.

I hope there's a way to do this.

We're adding them manually. It has an option of Front / Back / Both Aligned / Both Relative. Since we have page 1 on the Front and 2 on the Back that the marks would follow the logic. Oh well. We've a lot to learn.