Looking for a huge favor. We're considering a Xitron Sierra RIP to replace our older Nexus 9.5. We are starting to print a lot of large sports posters, full coverage, lots of type, transparency, you name it. They tie up the nexus way long. (Running on Win Server 2003, 4 gigs ram, so not too powerful). Would any Sierra user consider running a sample file on their rip to see how long it would take? Usual Golden Rocket Pony prize is involved.
Ear? think you're the only one on Serria, though I believe XMF is basically the same just Fuji branded.
Quote from: tuff_gong on June 25, 2015, 01:24:44 PMLooking for a huge favor. We're considering a Xitron Sierra RIP to replace our older Nexus 9.5. We are starting to print a lot of large sports posters, full coverage, lots of type, transparency, you name it. They tie up the nexus way long. (Running on Win Server 2003, 4 gigs ram, so not too powerful). Would any Sierra user consider running a sample file on their rip to see how long it would take? Usual Golden Rocket Pony prize is involved.
Any chance of the free Nexus 10.1.3 upgrade or have you thrown out the service contract? Also, v9 & v10 can be run on a Mac-based server, which you could beef up and configure pretty cheaply. Once we switched the speeds increased drastically. Nexus 10.1.3 is very solid. However, if you can't get in for free the alternative for a workflow switch is probably the best idea.
No service contract. Nexus is pretty expensive and we'd pay for a lot of capability that we just don't need.
I sent you a PM with my particulars, Tuffy. I'd be happy to preform a speed test for you.
Okay, I downloaded and ripped your sample file.
At first, it was failing to render. It gave me an APPE error: Invalid trapping.
I ran an EnFocus preflight on it and discovered that it was saved as PDF version 1.4, but was created in InDesign 5.5. This is not good. There is no reason to make press quality art backwards compatible. I re-fried the PDF up to version 1.7 (Acro 8/9), which supports all of the new mask and trans features that this poster is using. It then ripped in less than 2 minutes.
Quote from: Ear on June 29, 2015, 10:37:40 AMOkay, I downloaded and ripped your sample file.
At first, it was failing to render. It gave me an APPE error: Invalid trapping.
I ran an EnFocus preflight on it and discovered that it was saved as PDF version 1.4, but was created in InDesign 5.5. This is not good. There is no reason to make press quality art backwards compatible. I re-fried the PDF up to version 1.7 (Acro 8/9), which supports all of the new mask and trans features that this poster is using. It then ripped in less than 2 minutes.
If you refried it by "refrying" then you went from pdf to ps and back to pdf. That stripped all the transparency and other features out of the pdf. Pdf 1.4 is perfectly valid, no reason to do anything to it.
Tuff, resave it as "high quality print" or pdf/x-4 and tray again.
You are correct, it was more likely that I flattened the transparency but I do get more trouble out of PDF v1.4 than newer versions.
So, that particular PDF, in all of its glory, had flaws that caused my APPE to barf it up. I flattened it and the sucker ripped in 70 seconds. The original ripped fine when I turned trapping off too, but took longer than the flat version. I will mention that I have seen the rip fail files, but not in a long time and never due to that specific error.
I'm still sticking to my "don't backsave PDFs to v1.4". I do not find v1.4 to be "perfectly valid" and see no reason to not make the PDF as current as possible (v1.7). For instance, v1.4 does not support full embedding of OpenType fonts.
Anyway, it is the old "what I can get away with" vs "what is correct" argument. I'd rather not just try to get away with the bare minimum v1.4 when I can easily save as v1.7, which is current and proper.
Quote from: Ear on June 29, 2015, 02:13:03 PMI'm still sticking to my "don't backsave PDFs to v1.4". I do not find v1.4 to be "perfectly valid" and see no reason to not make the PDF as current as possible (v1.7). For instance, v1.4 does not support full embedding of OpenType fonts.
Anyway, it is the old "what I can get away with" vs "what is correct" argument. I'd rather not just try to get away with the bare minimum v1.4 when I can easily save as v1.7, which is current and proper.
PDF 1.4 is proper and current. The ISO spec's are based on PDF 1.4. I get it, it's your choice.
I find PDF's that have problems trapping are due to a huge amount of paths in the file usually because some illustrator genius made their latest masterpiece without regard to file complexity. Flattening will help it go through the rip and trap but the quality will suffer. When I run across files like this I turn the trapping off and let it fly.
Quote from: mattbeals on June 29, 2015, 02:37:35 PMQuote from: Ear on June 29, 2015, 02:13:03 PMI'm still sticking to my "don't backsave PDFs to v1.4". I do not find v1.4 to be "perfectly valid" and see no reason to not make the PDF as current as possible (v1.7). For instance, v1.4 does not support full embedding of OpenType fonts.
Anyway, it is the old "what I can get away with" vs "what is correct" argument. I'd rather not just try to get away with the bare minimum v1.4 when I can easily save as v1.7, which is current and proper.
PDF 1.4 is proper and current. The ISO spec's are based on PDF 1.4. I get it, it's your choice.
If 1.4 is current, why did they bother updating to 1.5, 1.6 and finally, 1.7?
I say v1.4 is neither proper nor current. Actually, by definition, it is 3 versions prior to the current version. :rotf: :hello: :kona:
Quote from: Joe on June 29, 2015, 02:44:39 PMI find PDF's that have problems trapping are due to a huge amount of paths in the file usually because some illustrator genius made their latest masterpiece without regard to file complexity. Flattening will help it go through the rip and trap but the quality will suffer. When I run across files like this I turn the trapping off and let it fly.
Exactly. When I saw this file open in Acrobat, it took forever to preview the 9000 paths.
And you are correct... the 3 things that made it rip quickly were: 1) flattening. 2) turning off trapping. 3) giving Matt a wedgie (actually didn't make it rip quicker but it was pretty funny and made me feel better)
Quote from: Ear on June 29, 2015, 03:15:58 PMQuote from: mattbeals on June 29, 2015, 02:37:35 PMQuote from: Ear on June 29, 2015, 02:13:03 PMI'm still sticking to my "don't backsave PDFs to v1.4". I do not find v1.4 to be "perfectly valid" and see no reason to not make the PDF as current as possible (v1.7). For instance, v1.4 does not support full embedding of OpenType fonts.
Anyway, it is the old "what I can get away with" vs "what is correct" argument. I'd rather not just try to get away with the bare minimum v1.4 when I can easily save as v1.7, which is current and proper.
PDF 1.4 is proper and current. The ISO spec's are based on PDF 1.4. I get it, it's your choice.
If 1.4 is current, why did they bother updating to 1.5, 1.6 and finally, 1.7?
I say v1.4 is neither proper nor current. Actually, by definition, it is 3 versions prior to the current version. :rotf: :hello: :kona:
Because there is not added benefit to updating the ISO specs. Just because the newer PDF versions exist does not mean the previous ones are invalid or otherwise inferior.
Sometimes it means exactly that.
Okay. You're welcome to that opinion, but don't pass it off as fact.
I had a customer send me a 1.3 file from CC 14 that was all jacked up. Told her to save as PDF/X-4:2008 or at least something above a 15 year old version that doesn't support transparency. Magically all the jacked up artifacts went away.
Instead of a pissing contest, what is the most stable, stock PDF setting to use? I've been wondering this for a while. From what I have read PDF/X-4:2008 seems to be the best.
I have my own settings here that doesn't throw anything out. This gives me monster PDF files. I've been considering changing to a stock export mode that I can tell designers to use that will give me the best results. File quality has been on a downward spiral for years now and I want to make it as east as possible for the client to get me a somewhat working PDF. Making it easy for them might be the difference between us getting the job that the guy down the street gets because the salesman says no problem to any piece of shit.
Ear obviously has had issues with 1.4. He has found a way around it, right or not. Matt, can you point us to information that supports that 1.4 works? I'm well aware that you know your shit, far more than me so I'm not doubting your opinions but I like to read facts and then experiment on my own to see if it will work in my production environment.
Plain and simple the job option that is for prepress is PDF/X-4 although I change the image compression to ZIP from the stupid ass default setting of jpeg. Now of course if you are using some kind of RIP that doesn't handle transparency well that one isn't for you.
Quote from: mattbeals on June 29, 2015, 03:39:21 PMOkay. You're welcome to that opinion, but don't pass it off as fact.
Thanks, glad I have your permission.
So, does v1.4 support full embedding of Open Type Fonts? N-Channel color space? How about jpeg 2000 compression? Just curious...
:popcorn:
Will .jpeg compression cause any issues? I have a tough enough time getting bleed, if I ask for them to change a setting lord knows what I will get.
Right. So, instead of asking dense clients to change compression, use a different color space or not use OpenType fonts, FFS, you can save as a current PDF version. Or you can go back more than a decade and continue to flog that dead horse. ;) Evolve or die.
:deadhorse:
JPEG compression is the default for all Adobe job options I believe. Usually it doesn't cause any problems if set to "Maximum" but there have been a few instances where we've had issues where clearly with ZIP compression the images were sharper and clearer than with jpeg compression. I think it was with images that were already jpeg compressed to hell an back and then when the PDF job option the customer used compressed them one more time they went to shit. Having them re-made with ZIP compression and they were as good as the original copy the customer had...which wasn't great but better than the first PDF they sent.
Both of the standard Adobe job options "High Quality" and "Press Quality" by default give you a PDF 1.4. PDF/X-4 gives you a PDF 1.6. To me that is todays standard but most customers will automatically choose "High Quality" or "Press Quality" if you don't beat it into their heads to NOT use them.
All I know is, when clients use 1.4 and OpenType fonts, they are forced to convert to CID Composite fonts. I would much rather leave things like fonts in their full form. It just doesn't make sense to use a standard that doesn't cover all the bases. Also it doesn't support NChannel color, which can be a big deal where an InDesign drop shadow intersects a spot color. I have seen v1.4 PDFs have trouble in this instance.
It's not difficult or time consuming to save as v1.7, is it? Just seems lazy. Why not just keep writing postscript files while you're at it and edit PDFs in Illustrator instead of PitStop. Wait, I know, let's bring film back! I miss the smell of the waxer and hand cutting marks in the OVM. ;D
Quote from: Ear on June 30, 2015, 10:43:35 AMAll I know is, when clients use 1.4 and OpenType fonts, they are forced to convert to CID Composite fonts. I would much rather leave things like fonts in their full form. It just doesn't make sense to use a standard that doesn't cover all the bases. Also it doesn't support NChannel color, which can be a big deal where an InDesign drop shadow intersects a spot color. I have seen v1.4 PDFs have trouble in this instance.
It's not difficult or time consuming to save as v1.7, is it? Just seems lazy. Why not just keep writing postscript files while you're at it and edit PDFs in Illustrator instead of PitStop. Wait, I know, let's bring film back! I miss the smell of the waxer and hand cutting marks in the OVM. ;D
I agree with you man. Use PDF/X:4 and change the compression to ZIP and you are golden.
Yes. ZIP compression is the way2go.