I'm sure we have all ran into this...we make a PDF small enough to email and customer complains about quality, then you send the high res via a file transfer site and now they complain because of the traps are all gooned when they are open the PDF in some other free PDF viewer other than Acrobat Reader. :gom:
Is there such a thing as a happy medium? And now the bosses, want a file size small enough to be able to email and still show trap. Yeah sure...I want a company car with unlimited mileage and gas.
We have Pitstop, and I tired that, which it did a great job, but is there a better way, or some sort of a "standard"?
nope and nope.
I've spelled it out in emails till I'm blue in the face,
"these are LOW RES PROOFS, the high res file does not contain the low res artifacts."
then I get the phone call, "why is my logo kinda crappy?"....
:shoots_self:
PDF 1.7, into an APPE RIP is a valid soft proof.
Other than that, there are no rendered CTP proofs that accurately show trap, other than looking at rendered flats in the RIP client. They want separated 1-bit platesetter tiffs? Some workflows claim to show rendered soft proofs, but I have yet to see it. They are all just preflighted PDFs in the magic client portal.
Quote from: Ear on March 13, 2018, 10:49:19 AMPDF 1.7, into an APPE RIP is a valid soft proof.
Other than that, there are no rendered CTP proofs that accurately show trap, other than looking at rendered flats in the RIP client. They want separated 1-bit platesetter tiffs? Some workflows claim to show rendered soft proofs, but I have yet to see it. They are all just preflighted PDFs in the magic client portal.
We have rendered soft proofs (and screened) in Prinergy. Not to send to customers though. No way you could view them online. It would take an hour or two to display with even high speed internet. :rotf:
Exactly. Sierra has a rendered 3D soft proof, screened and paginated... but it either needs my workflow viewer client or a java applet to view. I have actually sent them to a couple of clients but they have to be nerdy enough to load and use the .jar file I send them. So, it's possible, just not practical... yet
We run our proofs through the rip with the trapping on.... results in a 1200 dpi raster pdf and you can see the trapping.
Comes out at about 70MB for a 4/4 11x17 inch pdf. I question how long it would take to draw on screen for some older computers, it's pretty slow here on a new and very quick IMac. And yes, you could not email these at all. A 24 page book might be into the GB range.
LOL - don't do it. If you do it once, it will be required FOREVER ever ever...
send a screen capture of it
:rotf:
Or print it out and use your phone to take a picture and text it to the client. :rotf:
How about this, high res production file, no downloads, standard browser.
https://www.enfocus.com/en/appstore/product/pdf-review-module
Tantalizing, abc.
Doesn't solve the rendered proof problem, but with the right PDF and preflight, I don't believe looking at the dot proof to be as important as in the past.
That actually looks really cool. Currently, for people who don't want a hard proof, I am running an Enfocus Preflight and sending them a report via email, with my comments and suggestions. The PDF review module looks like it would take care of a lot of my digital legwork with keeping soft proofs moving.
We actually have some users who take a rendered PDF out of their workflow and push that for approval.
We actually have a trial version for this if you want to have a play, it uses Switch as a backbone which bumps up the cost a bit, but also adds automation for proofing and a lot more. Linking it to something like an upstream MIS and a downstream prepress workflow really kicks ass.
Normally I just run the same PDF as I would print from through the refine process but without trapping. Theory is it should be the same file just without trapping that confuses everyone and has stopped jobs here dead in their tracks. Seriously. I've had to explain multiple times to multiple people, normally higher up the ladder, what trapping is. They have stopped rush jobs because they didn't know how to view a PDF correctly.
These are not small print companies. They have their own prepress departments yet nobody there knows WTF trapping is or didn't bother to ask the burnt out, frazzled, angry motherfucker in the corner that's doing 99% of the work because they are surrounded by blood sausages.
I just run it without trapping, maybe use pitstop to make it smaller and upload it and wait for the email of how there is no attachment right above the big 24 point blue type with the link for the download.
I have just found, that through the trapping process at the rip, weirdness happens that would not be exposed with the trapping off. Just sayin is all. I feel better running the Epson ( new and improved Epson we have) with the trapping on.
Quote from: abc on March 13, 2018, 03:44:37 PMHow about this, high res production file, no downloads, standard browser.
I'm intrigued, how do I go about seeing a demo of the PDF review module? We currently do not have Switch, just PitStop Pro 13.
If you ping me an email at 'andrewb@enfocus.com' I'll get one of our local partners to do an online demo for you.
Happy to help, may even sit in on it.
We use InSite SmartReview which let's the customer view the refined with trapping PDF. It hasn't been RIP'd yet but neither has a PDF if you were sending that. If they want to see a RIP'd proof we would send them an Epson 9000 proof sent as a tiff from Prinergy using the same RIP that will be used to send to plate. My understanding about the Switch PDF Review module is that the customer needs to load some software on their end. You get 5 seats so 5 customers can each view one PDF at a time. You need switch and the PDF Review Module and it runs on your server. I believe the Review Module is around $3600 itself. We have about 1300 InSite customers. Some like to page through a 2000 page book which is easy to do in SmartReview or the standard Preview option.
Close John but no cigar.
No downloads on the customer side, just a standard browser.
That's very important, it's a very smooth customer experience.
It's a concurrent model, so licensing is the number of users that are on the system at the same time.
The total number is irrelevant, it's the amount at one time.
We also have an overspill feature to handle the peaks and troughs of production.
My apologies, Andrew. I must have been thinking about the Connect or the Web Services module or one of the other Enfocus product where I thought I read required sending the customer something to put on their computer. Thanks for clarifying that.
JohnO, we used to have InSite, but had too many issues with it back when it was Java based, and many customers and management really didn't like it. So when it came time to do an upgrade this past year, they decided to axe it. Granted if they would have allowed me to spend more time in it, and with customers, it might have been successful, but I was having to wear WAY too many hats at that point.
Quote from: scottrsimons on March 20, 2018, 12:45:34 PMJohnO, we used to have InSite, but had too many issues with it back when it was Java based, and many customers and management really didn't like it. So when it came time to do an upgrade this past year, they decided to axe it. Granted if they would have allowed me to spend more time in it, and with customers, it might have been successful, but I was having to wear WAY too many hats at that point.
I agree that it is really nice that it is no longer Java based. Much easier to support.
Quote from: JohnO on March 20, 2018, 01:01:10 PMQuote from: scottrsimons on March 20, 2018, 12:45:34 PMJohnO, we used to have InSite, but had too many issues with it back when it was Java based, and many customers and management really didn't like it. So when it came time to do an upgrade this past year, they decided to axe it. Granted if they would have allowed me to spend more time in it, and with customers, it might have been successful, but I was having to wear WAY too many hats at that point.
I agree that it is really nice that it is no longer Java based. Much easier to support.
Both Java and Flash being removed was a great thing. Made my whole work life a whole lot easier.
One other plus for InSite is that you can choose to allow the customer to be able to download their PDF files if they prefer to rather than using SmartReview or Preview.
Quote from: abc on March 17, 2018, 07:21:30 AMIf you ping me an email at 'andrewb@enfocus.com' I'll get one of our local partners to do an online demo for you.
Happy to help, may even sit in on it.
I may very well piggyback onto that offer. We've got a bunch of clients currently that we take wayyyyy to many steps to get PDF Proofs out too, imo. We're also adding (via a new MIS system) Switch so I'm hoping the Review Module could tie into that MIS system's Switch install. That's taking longer to get going though, and it'll be months before it's stable enough to introduce anything additional - but I can dream & explore!
Slappy we can make that work, and scott's ok with it.
drop me a mail and we can get the date arranged over email.
We have Insite and I have nothing good to say about it.
I demo'ed Enfocus PDF Review and was very pleasantly surprised.
Once we finalize our MIS/ERP deployment, I am sure we will try to replace Insite with PDF Review.
Hopefully by that time PDF Review will be on version 2 with even more features and more mature.
-Major benefit that I see is that is vendor neutral, it does not mater which workflow you are running, you can tie PDF Review with anything and everything at the same time.
Also, you are in full control of the PDF and what you want to do before and after the review.
No need to manage clients and administer it.
We are small, by most standards, and relatively low volume. We're running the latest Fujifilm XMF 'flow, as well as upgraded Black Magic.
It's a case-by-case, for us. The *best* 'downsizer', lately, for me, has been Pitstop's EAL, Minimize File Size. It just seems to work. But that's on pre-rendered files. If we use Exported PDFs from Black Magic, which will have full render-integrity, including Trapping, we can usually tweak the settings to reach a compromise on quality/file size.
But the pre-rendered, (Exporting of the imposed from XMF, then >Minimize File Size), is our usual go-to.
But yep, for larger places I'd imagine online viewing, (no downloads), is the future. Smaller places too, for that matter.
Quote from: zox on March 21, 2018, 02:18:29 PMWe have Insite and I have nothing good to say about it.
I demo'ed Enfocus PDF Review and was very pleasantly surprised.
Once we finalize our MIS/ERP deployment, I am sure we will try to replace Insite with PDF Review.
Hopefully by that time PDF Review will be on version 2 with even more features and more mature.
-Major benefit that I see is that is vendor neutral, it does not mater which workflow you are running, you can tie PDF Review with anything and everything at the same time.
Also, you are in full control of the PDF and what you want to do before and after the review.
No need to manage clients and administer it.
It is much better since they got Flash and Java out of it. But I'll bet the Enfocus solution is about $37 billion dollars cheaper than Kodaks.
Quote from: Joe on March 21, 2018, 05:07:04 PMQuote from: zox on March 21, 2018, 02:18:29 PMWe have Insite and I have nothing good to say about it.
I demo'ed Enfocus PDF Review and was very pleasantly surprised.
Once we finalize our MIS/ERP deployment, I am sure we will try to replace Insite with PDF Review.
Hopefully by that time PDF Review will be on version 2 with even more features and more mature.
-Major benefit that I see is that is vendor neutral, it does not mater which workflow you are running, you can tie PDF Review with anything and everything at the same time.
Also, you are in full control of the PDF and what you want to do before and after the review.
No need to manage clients and administer it.
It is much better since they got Flash and Java out of it. But I'll bet the Enfocus solution is about $37 billion dollars cheaper than Kodaks.
Kodaks..... replace the K with a V and it looks alot like vodka. Yummmm
Quote from: frailer on March 21, 2018, 04:27:17 PMBut yep, for larger places I'd imagine online viewing, (no downloads), is the future. Smaller places too, for that matter.
Trying this and getting the clients to do this is another story. I'm currently trying to get our clients all on XMF Remote for uploads and approvals.
Back when we first got InSite, I could see the potential, but there was going to be a LOT of work getting customers to be knowledgeable enough to use it. It wasn't just point and click. If we were just dealing with experienced graphic professionals, then no problems, but we weren't. So in the end NO GO, InSite had TO GO.
I have been to the latest GUA and had a little hands on with the latest InSite, and it sure does look and operate a LOT better than in the past. But for us, it was a little too late for our investment that had not panned out. It was time to stop... :deadhorse:
When we got Insite we disabled all customer accounts on our FTP server and told them they had create a job and upload through Insite. And told them we weren't printing their job until they approve their pages within Insite. No exceptions. Except there are exceptions every now and then because salesmen (Safari corrected salesmen to salmon :D ) were born without spines. In the most part it has worked out well. Customers are like children. They will get away with everything you let them get away with. Put the hammer down and they fall in line. (Unless it is at creating proper PDF's. Nothing I have found fixes that.)
We have about 1300 InSite users. We used to do a webex demo to a new customer group. But now, the online Help is so good we seldom need to do this. We have an InSite 101 PDF that we can send out if need be as well. It actually is fairly intuitive. Log-in. Create a job. Upload your file. Preview it. They can have e-mail notifications going out at whatever the step of the process to the CSR, approver, etc. Non-Kodak workflows like Canon and HP that we have in the plant, can still use it as a portal into the plant and the files can then be used on these other, non-Kodak workflows.
Our prepress manager always emails our own 'Insite 101' PDF to every new customer/user. I've yet to see one look at it. >:( In fact just this past week we had a new customer and she emailed him along with the 'Insite 101' PDF. Later he emailed asking if we had any instructions for using Insite and she emailed him the same PDF again. Later he emailed me asking if we had any instructions for using Insite so I emailed him the same PDF. And later that day for fourth time he emailed her again asking if we had any instructions for how to use Insite!
:blowup:
I'm just amazed you have customers that listen. Most of mine are either "I have no clue what I'm doing" or "we've been doing it this way for 30 years" kinda people. The former don't give a shit because they know sales will make an exception for their snowflake ass and the latter just want to prove they know what they're doing creating EPSs out of quark 3 on their quadra.
Quote from: Farabomb on March 23, 2018, 05:56:14 AMI'm just amazed you have customers that listen. Most of mine are either "I have no clue what I'm doing" or "we've been doing it this way for 30 years" kinda people. The former don't give a shit because they know sales will make an exception for their snowflake ass and the latter just want to prove they know what they're doing creating EPSs out of quark 3 on their quadra.
At least you get an EPS out of a (an ancient) page layout program, we get them our of M$ Word, Publisher and even Excel, Apple Pages, and on occasion still Ragemaker, oh and some Corel Draw. :banghead: Now I know I'm showing my bias to Adobe products.
I have only seen files from CUBA come in Corel Draw. Think they still do their work in that program. Haven't had any work from them in a few years but some might be coming in the future.
One client still uses Quark but haven't seen another Quark file in at least 5 years.
With the exception of the Microsoft stuff, I have'nt seen any of those other programs in at least 10 years.
Quote from: Farabomb on March 23, 2018, 05:56:14 AMI'm just amazed you have customers that listen. Most of mine are either "I have no clue what I'm doing" or "we've been doing it this way for 30 years" kinda people. The former don't give a shit because they know sales will make an exception for their snowflake ass and the latter just want to prove they know what they're doing creating EPSs out of quark 3 on their quadra.
Who me? I have no customers that actually listen. ZERO!
I actually didn't know about the Pitstop Minimize File Size action. That works much better than the custom settings I had setup in Acrobat for Optimizing the file.
Thanks!
We do get an above average amount of MS Word, Excel and Power Point files... When I started here, the shop was actually doing production work from Publisher, but I converted all of those files over to InDesign so I don't have to deal with that shit anymore.
Quote from: AaronH on March 23, 2018, 04:38:21 PMI actually didn't know about the Pitstop Minimize File Size action. That works much better than the custom settings I had setup in Acrobat for Optimizing the file.
Thanks!
Me either, somehow got past me but man, it does an
amazing job! Going to try adding to our XMF workflow for generating Client PDFs instead of the default method now. Should be easy since XMF integrates Pitstop Actions pretty readily.
Quote from: Slappy on March 24, 2018, 09:17:08 PMMe either, somehow got past me but man, it does an amazing job! Going to try adding to our XMF workflow for generating Client PDFs instead of the default method now. Should be easy since XMF integrates Pitstop Actions pretty readily.
Let me know how that goes. I haven't added a Pitstop action to XMF yet either, but that would be a great way to automate that one.
When you do a save as of a XMF pdf it lowers the size pretty dramatically
The XMF pdfs do come out large tho!
Quote from: Joe on March 22, 2018, 11:39:17 AMOur prepress manager always emails our own 'Insite 101' PDF to every new customer/user. I've yet to see one look at it. >:( In fact just this past week we had a new customer and she emailed him along with the 'Insite 101' PDF. Later he emailed asking if we had any instructions for using Insite and she emailed him the same PDF again. Later he emailed me asking if we had any instructions for using Insite so I emailed him the same PDF. And later that day for fourth time he emailed her again asking if we had any instructions for how to use Insite!
:blowup:
We do InSite demos via go to meeting with all new customers, at least 90% of them. Demo takes about 20-30 minutes and cuts down on problems and confused customers. I am the one that does most of them. To be honest, they are pretty fun. I cover upload, ways to review proofs and preflight concerns.
We create all jobs and do not allow the customer to create them.
We have had InSite and this workflow since 2009. Started the demos in about 2010. It was painful at first but once we got them used to the system, most love it.
Oh good lord...I would have to :shoots_self: explaining to them what 'go to meeting' is and how to use it. :deadhorse: I would have to have a 'go to meeting' just to show them how to do a 'go to meeting' for Insite. :rotf:
I have customers and can't figure out a hyperlink in an email.