Quote from: Joe on June 25, 2015, 01:12:48 PMHave you looked at XMF? It is about half the cost of Connect and the support is about 1/3 of Kodaks.

no i really didnt know what it is till today
but i'll look into it - doesn't hurt to have more option to chose from.

Quote from: Farabomb on June 25, 2015, 01:05:33 PMI'm surprised Kodak will even talk to you not being the original purchaser.

I'm going to stay at my current version as long as I possibly can. It works quite well but upgrading would end up costing more than just buying a new system from Fuji.

They talk to me allright, i dont know the backgrounds around it exactly... there is some tech support licence still active or somethin - im not sure.

i know the feeling, i was holding my old haidelberg workflow as long as i could, but company im working at is expanding and it just wasn't enough anymore

Quote from: Joe on June 25, 2015, 12:18:24 PM

Quote from: gertas on June 25, 2015, 11:22:39 AM

Quote from: Joe on June 25, 2015, 10:55:53 AMI wonder if they have a different version of APPE in Evo. I don't even think they still sell Evo do they?

im not sure - but i dont see why should they put different versions in EVO/Conect.

well they still sell it, last version - 6.0, but im not sure if i want a deadend rip sw.
ill get prices for evo and conect tomorow or next week and ill see...
And im kinda sure what my boss will say about it - so EVO it is

If you have access to the Prinergy forum at the GUA forums here is a thread about the EOL of EVO:

Prinergy Evo still available?

And a link to a Kodak person explaining why the shift to only one product:

Workflow Automation For Every Printer

But I'm still not 100% sure they have EOL'ed EVO.

well no, they want in registration form some Kodak Customer Number and GUA somethnig that i dont have...

tech support confirmed it early today that EVO is EOL... version 6.0 is last.

Quote from: Farabomb on June 25, 2015, 11:31:22 AMDid you buy it recently from Kodak? I"d be quite pissed if I spent the money on a defective product that has been fixed but will cost me more to work correctly.

Then again I have a one off version of EVO that never worked right from the get go. I believe XMF will be in my future.

no, it was from some bankrupted company and they use it only for year or so... make me wonder, why the bankrupt

Quote from: Joe on June 25, 2015, 10:55:53 AMI wonder if they have a different version of APPE in Evo. I don't even think they still sell Evo do they?

im not sure - but i dont see why should they put different versions in EVO/Conect.

well they still sell it, last version - 6.0, but im not sure if i want a deadend rip sw.
ill get prices for evo and conect tomorow or next week and ill see...
And im kinda sure what my boss will say about it - so EVO it is

Quote from: Joe on June 25, 2015, 10:33:11 AMAre you using Prinergy Connect or Evo because your screen shots are not the same as I see or ever saw in Prinergy Connect 5.x?

EVO. Its more basic version of prinergy i belive...

Quote from: Joe on June 25, 2015, 10:19:16 AMI used every version of Prinergy 5 and never had any issues like this. Just to be clear if you take one of the PDF's you posted the other day and run it through a refine process template the resulting normalized PDF looks good in Acrobat but when you make a VPS or plates from the normalized PDF you see the problem?

Yes. There was never problem in PDF - meaning, i never see any missing objects in pdf - only in vps and plates.
Sorry i had to write it sooner to make it clear...

And i try to call tech support and they confirmed it - they know about it...

Quote from: Farabomb on June 25, 2015, 08:17:15 AMAnother reason why Kodak is not on the list if we ever upgrade our RIP again. It kinda sucks as prinergy does work very well overall.

i have experience only with heidelberg for 10 years and prinergy for only hlaf a year... nothin else and so far i think heidelberg is just another league... prinergy feels like downgrade in everything but i still hope it will get better as i know it better...

Quote from: Farabomb on June 25, 2015, 07:50:20 AMInteresting, I didn't consider a software bug but it makes sense. I'm kinda glad now that we couldn't upgrade.

well, its not considered as bug because it can handle older transparency profiles - only new one makes problems (cs6+)
but basicly to fix it, i have to pay up... and i cant downgrade either

Quote from: Farabomb on June 25, 2015, 07:00:39 AMThat's the weird thing, your settings basically seem to be the same as mine. I should have some time today so I mat set mine up like yours and see if I get the same results. It very well mat be that signa is doing something to the files. It doesn't make sense but could it be an old version that does not support transparency? I know I have options in preps to use .eps files and in older versions it wouldn't take PDF files.

I can send over a preps template for you to test and see if that fixes it. What is the output file from signa, .jdf? Are there other options? At one time I did have to change preps from .pjtf to .jdf because of weirdness.

well problem with missing object presisted even without signa in workflow... raw pdf file (same i send here few days ago) right to VPS a and boom - missing objects.

But i might find out what my problem really is:
in prinergy 5.2 is some kind of old and problematic version of adobe pdf print engine that is known to have issues with transparency. In 5.1 is older stable version. In 5.3+ its fixed. So I tried to use CPSI and problem is gone - vps is ok.
CPSI isnt ideal but sadly i have lastest prinergy version for my licence so i have to buy new one if i want to use adobe pdf print engine.

Thanks to everyone who help me narrow it down so i can find this problem!

Quote from: Farabomb on June 25, 2015, 06:22:17 AMI think if you normalize first, then use those files to impose your issues will go away. I've worked on Rampage, AGFA, and Kodak systems and demoed a bunch of others, including some crap Chinese knockoff RIP and in all of them the first step is to RIP or normalize the file. It serves as a preflight (shitty as it is on prinergy) and results in a stable file that shouldn't give you issues. Normalizing as the last step is just asking for trouble.

ok, i have no problem with that.
But right now files without imposition have same problems - missing object in VPS and platteseter. No matter if i imposition them or not - No matter if refine/normlazie them or not - same objects missing. And i need to solve this properly and not with x1a...
You and Joe got them right, i need to find out why i have problem, Its clear problem is somwhere in my prinergy or its settings...

Quote from: motormount on June 24, 2015, 02:13:40 PMNever seen prinergy in my life but reading this it must be happening in signa.

I assume you got an old version of signa as well, so you must learn preps better.

I prefer signa myself, but once you've build a basic set of templates preps in some cases could be more quick than signa.

Other way insist on x1a files - even x3 don't support transparency , or flatten files in acrobat with the flatenner tool or pitstop before importing them to prinergy!

Its exactly where i am now. i must insist on x1a or repair it to x1a... and i dont like it a bit....

Quote from: Farabomb on June 24, 2015, 10:03:40 AMOur workflow is PDF > normalize > check for issues > normalized PDF into impo > all proofs and plates are made from that data.

It seems that you normalize after imposition. I don't know why you would do that as with all the systems I've worked with normalization or whatever they happen to call it is the first step. You have a known good file and then work with that. Maybe your system is different but in all I've read about prinergy normalization is the first step.

With Preps 6 reinventing the wheel there is no reason to learn 5. You didn't mention what version you have but I agree with the stick with what you know.

well its old habit i think - in heidelberg workflow there was no normalization/refine before or after imposition only preflight before imposition and every "normlaizing" was direct part of rip - it was a little bit faster workflow system. Differences was made by profiles in output from imposition sw. So this whole normlazition a and refine stuff is new for me... but i dont see problem in switching it to first normlaize and then imposition - dosnt matter to me at all...
i have preps 6 here, and prinergy 5

Quote from: Joe on June 24, 2015, 10:00:23 AMOK I think I see where the problem might be if some of my assumptions are correct.

If you open one of the refined PDF's into Acrobat before going to signastation is the transparency OK at that point? My assumption is that it is. If correct, that is telling me your refine is OK. So then you place the refined PDF's into signastation and output imposed PDF's. And the transparency might even be ok in that imposed PDF in Acrobat but the VPS and plate files you get after processing the signastation PDF is bad. If all of that is correct the problem is happening in the signastation phase. If you must use signastation I would suggest instead of outputting a PDF from sign station to output JDF and import that into Prinergy. But my number one suggestion is since you already have Preps is to learn to use it. Both Farabomb and I have shown the files work fine using Preps.

I think u misunderstand, transparency is ok after imposition. All is going wrong after i hit prinergy refine/normlaizer and then VPS or VPS withnout refine/normlazation and even not imposed/raw data.
Imposition SW isnt issue here. But i can try JDF output, but we still use pdf for proof...

Quote from: Farabomb on June 24, 2015, 07:52:21 AMPrinergy is a great system and Joe and I proved it handles these files correctly. We just need to figure...

Exactly, it bite my ass everyday here so i much appreciate everyone trying to help...
It will be sometin small, as usually, Just to find it...  :undecided: