I've been doing some testing to speed things up in the old rip and I came up with much faster ripping with a separated PS file from InDesign and dropping THAT into the Navigator rip for plates. In the Roam window I compared the Cyan plate from a ps file ripped on my Mac, laying it down on a ripped file from Navigator and saw no difference. In a fraction of the time. Instead of moving a 20mb file across the network for it to rip 45 minutes, I moved a 100mb file across the network and it took only 2 minutes to rip. I made sure to change my screen angles in InDesign to reflect the same angles in the rip.
Is there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way? I do the layout in InDesign to the sheet size, add my own side guides, reg marks, colorbar - all the rip is doing is translating the file to plate.
Quote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Quote from: Slappy on July 18, 2018, 12:22:46 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Okay, Okay, Okay, that wasn't fair! Maybe true, but not fair!
LOL, thanks for the...whatever.
Quote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 12:25:39 PMQuote from: Slappy on July 18, 2018, 12:22:46 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Okay, Okay, Okay, that wasn't fair! Maybe true, but not fair!
LOL, thanks for the...whatever.
You will be fine until something comes out wrong/missing. When that happens...good luck.
Quote from: Joe on July 18, 2018, 01:24:09 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 12:25:39 PMQuote from: Slappy on July 18, 2018, 12:22:46 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Okay, Okay, Okay, that wasn't fair! Maybe true, but not fair!
LOL, thanks for the...whatever.
You will be fine until something comes out wrong/missing. When that happens...good luck.
I'm cautious. Going to do a lot of back and forth tests.
This goes back to the issue I was having the other day with Navigator/Harlequin not launching because I went in and tried to give more memory to the application. Come to find out that Navigator 8 is only a 32 bit program and if I want to utiize the RAM I loaded in the 64 bit ready XP box, we need to upgrade to at least Navigator/Harlequin 10. The boss lives for not spendng money, even if I have to manually trap and put sheet marks around the page. The dollars for a new rip that traps would have been paid for by now, but hey - job security for me.
Quote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 01:41:37 PMQuote from: Joe on July 18, 2018, 01:24:09 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 12:25:39 PMQuote from: Slappy on July 18, 2018, 12:22:46 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Okay, Okay, Okay, that wasn't fair! Maybe true, but not fair!
LOL, thanks for the...whatever.
You will be fine until something comes out wrong/missing. When that happens...good luck.
I'm cautious. Going to do a lot of back and forth tests.
This goes back to the issue I was having the other day with Navigator/Harlequin not launching because I went in and tried to give more memory to the application. Come to find out that Navigator 8 is only a 32 bit program and if I want to utiize the RAM I loaded in the 64 bit ready XP box, we need to upgrade to at least Navigator/Harlequin 10. The boss lives for not spendng money, even if I have to manually trap and put sheet marks around the page. The dollars for a new rip that traps would have been paid for by now, but hey - job security for me.
If you run into your old self in that space-time continuum, don't shake hands. Same matter can't occupy the same space, and you might explode the whole universe.
Quote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 01:41:37 PMQuote from: Joe on July 18, 2018, 01:24:09 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 12:25:39 PMQuote from: Slappy on July 18, 2018, 12:22:46 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Okay, Okay, Okay, that wasn't fair! Maybe true, but not fair!
LOL, thanks for the...whatever.
You will be fine until something comes out wrong/missing. When that happens...good luck.
I'm cautious. Going to do a lot of back and forth tests.
This goes back to the issue I was having the other day with Navigator/Harlequin not launching because I went in and tried to give more memory to the application. Come to find out that Navigator 8 is only a 32 bit program and if I want to utilize the RAM I loaded in the 64 bit ready XP box, we need to upgrade to at least Navigator/Harlequin 10. The boss lives for not spending money, even if I have to manually trap and put sheet marks around the page. The dollars for a new rip that traps would have been paid for by now, but hey - job security for me.
Actually you would have to install a 64-bit OS before you can install the 64-bit version of Navigator/Harlequin 10. It would probably require Windows 7 64-bit as the 64-bit version of Windows XP was horribly buggy.
Quote from: Joe on July 18, 2018, 03:06:13 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 01:41:37 PMQuote from: Joe on July 18, 2018, 01:24:09 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 12:25:39 PMQuote from: Slappy on July 18, 2018, 12:22:46 PMQuote from: rickself on July 18, 2018, 11:23:43 AMIs there something glaringly wrong with doing it this way?
Aside from being stuck firmly in 1992? I suppose not! :lmao:
Okay, Okay, Okay, that wasn't fair! Maybe true, but not fair!
LOL, thanks for the...whatever.
You will be fine until something comes out wrong/missing. When that happens...good luck.
I'm cautious. Going to do a lot of back and forth tests.
This goes back to the issue I was having the other day with Navigator/Harlequin not launching because I went in and tried to give more memory to the application. Come to find out that Navigator 8 is only a 32 bit program and if I want to utilize the RAM I loaded in the 64 bit ready XP box, we need to upgrade to at least Navigator/Harlequin 10. The boss lives for not spending money, even if I have to manually trap and put sheet marks around the page. The dollars for a new rip that traps would have been paid for by now, but hey - job security for me.
Actually you would have to install a 64-bit OS before you can install the 64-bit version of Navigator/Harlequin 10. It would probably require Windows 7 64-bit as the 64-bit version of Windows XP was horribly buggy.
Yes, you would, went through this a couple of years ago. (windows 7, not XP).