Quote from: abc on February 17, 2015, 05:57:16 AM

Quote from: Lyzan on February 16, 2015, 11:23:25 PM

Quote from: abc on February 11, 2015, 12:53:46 PMMaybe the question should be a little more detailed?

There are multiple versions of the PDF/X family.

PDF/X-1a
PDF/X-3
PDF/X -4
PDF/X-5

Which one do you mean?

All of the above. :-)

Just let the XMF do its job - of course this means setting up appropriate parameters but not any settings related to creating PDF/X-1a, PDF/X-4 and preflighting.

//Lyzan

Actually this is not really true. The PDF/X specs are different in many ways.
OCG's (layers), Color Management, Transparency etc.
If you want to work with a standard you should know what standard. (btw no known application can create a PDF/X-5 yet!)

The issue I am trying to create here is that with a workflow like XMF (I am using 5.5), do you still think that you still need to use any of the PDF/X standard? Will you still require your clients to send you PDF/X-1a, for example? Or you'll just ask your client to send you a high quality PDFs with all fonts embedded.

Whether your file is PDF/X-4 or not, layers, transparency, etc., these could be handled by APPE easily, right?

Color management shall be best handled by the workflow.

My thought is that with modern workflow, do we still need to worry and consume precious time on things like layers, transparency, etc?

//Lyzan
 

I would never ask for a PDF X-1a these days unless I had a specific need for a flattened PDF.

Yes you can get by with a High quality PDF with fonts embedded without using any of the X standards. But why would you want to when the PDF X-4 standard was specifically created for the printing process? Using a PDF X-4 PDF will give you more reliable results in the long run.

Quote from: prepressure.comThe PDF/X-4 file format

PDF is a very versatile file format. Unfortunately this also means that it is very easy to create PDF files that are completely useless in a prepress environment. The solution to this problem is to define a set of rules that forbid the use of certain PDF functions that are irrelevant for printing purposes and to enforce others that do improve its usefulness in prepress. This set of rules is called PDF/X, a series of well defined subsets of the PDF standard that promise predictable and consistent PDF files.

What is a PDF/X-4 file?
PDF/X-4 files are regular PDF 1.6 files.

The use of transparency is allowed.
All color data can be grayscale, CMYK, named spot colors, RGB, Lab or ICC-profile based.
Image data can be 8-bit or 16-bit. 16-bit images are still rarely used and may cause issues with quite a few RIPs and workflows.
The use of layers is allowed. In PDF/X-4 these are not the 'regular' PDF layers (OCG or Optional Content Groups for the techies among us) but the more sophisticated OCCD layers (which actually combine multiple OCGs in a group). If a regular PDF has for instance a layer with comments and another one with contact information, both layers could be combined in a single 'info' OCCD layer. When I updated this page early 2008, there weren't any workflows on the market yet with proper support for handling OCCDs. Meanwhile callas pdfToolbox is the first PDF tool that has proper support for them.
The following restrictions apply to PDF/X-4 files:

All fonts must be embedded in the file. Embedding OpenType fonts is allowed.
OPI is not allowed in PDF/X-4 files: all image data must be embedded.
Compliant files cannot contain music, movies or non-printable annotations.
If there are annotations (sticky notes) in the PDF, they should be located outside the bleed area.
The file should not contain forms or Javascript code.
Only a limited number of compression algorithms are supported, JPEG 2000 being one of them.
Encryption cannot be used.
Transfer curves cannot be used.
Next to things that are not allowed, there is also some information that needs to be present in a PDF/X-4 file but that you may not find in regular PDF files:

There is an extra line of information which indicates that the PDF file is a PDF/X-4 file.
There is a separate flag (meaning a switch that is either ON or OFF) that details whether the PDF/X-4 file has already been trapped or not.
PDF/X-4 files contain extra operators that define the bleed and trim area.
The MediaBox defines the size of the entire document
The ArtBox or TrimBox defines the extent of the printable area.
If the file is to be printed with bleed, a BleedBox must be defined. It must be larger than the TrimBox/ArtBox, but smaller than the MediaBox.
The file needs to contain an output intent which describes the intended printing condition. The output intent is either:
an ICC color profile. Profiles can be embedded or referenced (in such a case when ICC profiles are externally supplied, such a file is called a PDF/X-4p file).
an output condition identifier, which is simply a text description of the intended print specifications (e.g. FOGRA27).
PDF/X-4 versions
The PDF/X specifications are evolving standards, which regularly get adapted to deal with newer technologies and applications as well as changes in the graphic arts industry. That is why the full name of PDF/X implementations includes the year they were established.

The original PDF/X-4 standard was also referred to as PDF/X-4:2007.
Early 2008 PDF/X-4 became an official ISO standard: ISO 15930-7:2008. That version is called PDF/X-4:2008.
There have been some complaints about the way fonts and colors are defined in the 2008 specifications. That is why a minor update of the specs is expected to be released in 2010. Those specs will be called PDF/X-4:2010.

I'd be happy if my clients would send me X-standard PDF. Most of the clients are not able to output a printable file anyway, so from my side, any chance to reduce errors iwould be appreciated.

For example the fonts: in a normal high quality PDF , there  is still a chance for the client to get the fonts not embedded proper (and mostly clients will take that chance!), but the X1 or X4 requires all fonts embedded, at least as subset.

And for those without APPE even nicer: An X1 can contain CMYK or spot colors, but no RGB, so there's one more error that might be reduced.

The only problem is that plenty of clients have never heard of X1 or X4, so you'll still receive the same crap like before...

I've given customers screen shots on how to create pdfs
If they're using indesign you can export a pdf setting for them.
I know some customers are not flexible tho.
That's why we have jobs I guess :laugh:

you can lead a horse to water...  but you can't make them drink.

The reason to use PDF/X vs. high quality print (which really are essentially the same thing) is that with PDF/X you have a few rigid rules that must be adhered to in order to be called "PDF/X". It's an easy way to filter out the chaff. If it's not PDF/X-"x" compliant, then something is very wrong. It's a simple and efficient way of pre-filtering everything.

Quote from: mattbeals on February 18, 2015, 12:05:47 PMThe reason to use PDF/X vs. high quality print (which really are essentially the same thing) is that with PDF/X you have a few rigid rules that must be adhered to in order to be called "PDF/X". It's an easy way to filter out the chaff. If it's not PDF/X-"x" compliant, then something is very wrong. It's a simple and efficient way of pre-filtering everything.

Like the retrograde specifying an output intent? :-)

How about the layers?

Layers are not PDF/X-4 compliant. Are you going to flatten it or let PDF engine do its job?

//Lyzan

Layers are allowed in X4, but not in X1 or X3. The same goes for transparencies. If my workflow can handle PDF X4 files, I would let it do the rest.

Layers or to give them their correct name 'Optional Content Groups' (OCG's) are definitely allowed in PDF/X-4 and are a very good reason to specify X-4.
In the future you'll see increased use of these for non-printing content like dielines etc

For my sins as well as working for Enfocus i'm a co-chair of the specifications committee at the Ghent Workgroup.
I mention this as there is a FREE output suite available which you can use to test if your workflow is correctly set up to process PDF/X-4. You can get the output suite here http://www.gwg.org/download/test-suites/ghent-output-suite/
In addition there are also datasheets from the major workflow vendors on how you should configure your workflow to process the Suite. You can see those here. http://www.gwg.org/instructions-successful-output-ghent-pdf-output-suite-4-0/

Even if you don't want to move to PDF/X-4 I think the suite is a very useful way to understand more about your worflow.
Please note you need to test the full workflow not just the rip. Normalising, Imposition, Color Management, Trapping and ripping. Any of these can break the workflow and cause issues.

Quote from: abc on February 22, 2015, 10:49:13 AMLayers or to give them their correct name 'Optional Content Groups' (OCG's) are definitely allowed in PDF/X-4 and are a very good reason to specify X-4.
In the future you'll see increased use of these for non-printing content like dielines etc

Thanks for clarifying. I did some digging. PDF/x-4:2008 in Adobe suite does not support layers. However, the PDF/X-4:2010 supported it.

Quote from: abc on February 22, 2015, 11:12:32 AMFor my sins as well as working for Enfocus i'm a co-chair of the specifications committee at the Ghent Workgroup.
I mention this as there is a FREE output suite available which you can use to test if your workflow is correctly set up to process PDF/X-4. You can get the output suite here http://www.gwg.org/download/test-suites/ghent-output-suite/
In addition there are also datasheets from the major workflow vendors on how you should configure your workflow to process the Suite. You can see those here. http://www.gwg.org/instructions-successful-output-ghent-pdf-output-suite-4-0/

Even if you don't want to move to PDF/X-4 I think the suite is a very useful way to understand more about your worflow.
Please note you need to test the full workflow not just the rip. Normalising, Imposition, Color Management, Trapping and ripping. Any of these can break the workflow and cause issues.

I am aware of this test suite and actually used it to test XMF 5.5 with no errors at all.

In my opinion, if you are using a "modern workflow", one should not bother about normalization, otherwise the workflow does not live on its intended purpose.

Quote from: abc on February 22, 2015, 10:49:13 AMLayers or to give them their correct name 'Optional Content Groups' (OCG's) are definitely allowed in PDF/X-4 and are a very good reason to specify X-4.
In the future you'll see increased use of these for non-printing content like dielines etc

While on paper having separate layers for different content in a print job is a wonderful thing, in reality I doubt us in the trenches will ever see it. No matter what tools are given to people only the ones that care enough will use them.

Most designers I've come across either don't care or are clueless. With printing being in such a decline the shop owners lack the testicular fortitude to go to their clients and explain how to create a better file. The designers continue on their blissful ignorance, shop owners keep eating reprints that could be easily avoided and on goes life.

Why is it getting warmer and why am I in this handbasket?

Quote from: Lyzan on February 22, 2015, 06:24:31 AMHow about the layers?

Layers are not PDF/X-4 compliant. Are you going to flatten it or let PDF engine do its job?

//Lyzan

Do you get a lot of PDF's with layers? I can count on one hand the number of times that I have. Even customers that would benefit from layers (versioning) don't even do it. Prinergy has an optional license for dealing with versioning for multi-layered PDF's. In my short experience with XMF I think it may be built into XMF or it could be a licensable addition. Not really sure. If you are getting a lot layered PDF's and you don't need layers you can open them in Acrobat and flatten the layers (which I think has nothing to do with flattening transparency).

Quote from: Lyzan on February 23, 2015, 02:34:30 AMIn my opinion, if you are using a "modern workflow", one should not bother about normalization, otherwise the workflow does not live on its intended purpose.

Why would you not want to normalize? (It's not a bad thing...neither is PDF X4 for that matter)

Are you saying you prefer a ROOM workflow as opposed to a NORM workflow?