Why so many different PDF/Distiller settings?

[Techboy]

Hi All,
Receiving and reviewing varies PDF/Distiller settings to create "proper" PDFs from our varies vendors are starting to look unmanageable lately. Many submitted their own custom distiller/print style/print presets for us to use... however, nearly every one is using slightly different settings.

Some wants you to add paper size in addition to using custom paper size with trim marks in Quark 6.5 or early versions and turning off Bleed + OPI extensions. The same two printers don't require additional trim mark when PDF is created through CS2/3. Sure, let's check off varies advance option setting as well.

So what's up with all the variation? I can understand different PDF workflow system and RIP requiring their own unique setups but lately this is looking more insane. And many of you wonder why your clients can't provide correct PDFs.

My earliest idea was to submit all files in PDF/X1 standard but that isn't possible because the default setting converts images to CMYK (sucks when you do a lot of 1-2 color jobs) and downsampling our Hi-Res images is a big no-no for our art dept.

Ideally, one should be able to setup a 1-color, 2-color, 4-color or more PDF settings but ONLY if we are working with one vendor.

3 settings per vendor x 2 dozen vendors = a major headache!

Wait, there's more... I need to setup entire art dept with all the settings and educate them... LOL, I need to start pray more often!!! I like challenges but this is crazy man!

Any advices gang?

[Jezza]

The easiest answer is to supply untrapped 'generic' HiRes pdfs and let the printer worry about their settings.

The way things are, seems to be the printers being overly helpful, trying to make their life easier and save you some money - no tinkering at their end.

However, this clearly isn't happening. It's possible that they have differing profiles for different presses and different stock - coated/uncoated for example.

If you can get a settings instruction on the job ticket then that would be helpful, though I fear it's unlikely.

[Joe]

Actually, all of us printers get together occasionally and think up new ways to screw with you people sending us files. This is our latest effort....

[mattbeals]

Generally speaking using the "high quality" settings are quite sufficient for all your work. It is essentially the same as the PDF/X-1a settings but:
Fonts that can't be embedded are allowed
Conversion of colors doesn't happen
PDF/X-1a or PDF/X-3 metadata keys aren't added

The problem with the PDF/X-1a:200x settings as provided by Adobe is that in order to make a file PDF/X-1a compliant it must be converted to CMYK. By default Adobe uses the SWOP profile. Which most people print some form of SWOP on coated or uncoated anyways. Quark if I recall correctly doesn't give you the option of making a PDF/X-1a:200x directly.

For Adobe apps you can't really make a 1, 2 4(CMYK) or 4+ PDF export setting. You either leave color alone or you convert to a color space. So that's real easy. With Quark you have a number of choices that each have their own side-effects.

I would submit that for Adobe apps you need:
Spot (and cmyk) this would be your catch-all setting
CMYK Coated - the coated profile could be what ever you want it.
CMYK Uncoated - same as above but for uncoated.

For Quark it would basically be the same thing.

Then in the settings I'd define 9pts of bleed, 9pt or 12pt offset for the marks
crop marks, page information, ZIP compression, no downsampling, "high resolution" transparency flattener, PDF v1.3. If you want to preserve transparency then make a new set for un/coated, PDF v1.5 and transparency will automatically be preserved (again, thank you adobe....)

Printers that don't need the page marks or info then can place the PDF by the bleed box which will have the net effect of ignoring the crop marks (remember the 12pt offset?). Those who do want the marks will place by the media box. Those that use automated imposition like Preps usually have Preps or the imposition program of choice set to use the trim box. Even if it is set to use the media box the content will still be centered in the imposition. Now with CS3 all the Adobe apps share the same common .joboptions file. It was like that in CS and CS2 to a certain degree but the settings were stored in separate places because of how the application specific settings were stored in the joboptions file itself.

And it wouldn't be such a bad thing to pass spot colors, tagged RGB or tagged CMYK to your printers so that they can do the conversion for you. That would make things much simpler on the export side. But then it would add a layer of complexity to the proofing stage(s) (and hopefully there's only one stage). Providing RGB also allows for a more flexible workflow on the back end for you amongst other things.

But generally speaking the "high quality" settings will get you 9/10ths of the way there right out of the box.

Look to PDF/X-4 and PDF/X-5...

[Techboy]

Hi Matt,
I think you'll be surprised to see the type of settings I have been receiving/reviewing. If I recall correctly, after setting up a particular domestic printer's distiller settings and then proceeding their InDesign specs... I noticed they are different! If Adobe CS3 is sharing all the same info... then something or somewhere is wrong.

In another instance, transparency flattener setting also varies. Some printers submitted their own specs instead of using "high resolution". I can counted 3-4 printers who done this.

I had to laugh and wonder if someone was drinking on the job. All these varies setting is maddening. Something is just not adding up. If PDF is suppose to be industry standard then it still has a long way to go.

PDF is quite good if you are dealing with just a few printers but when you have two dozen and some are oversea... this become unmanageable and even paralyzing. It's no wonder my boss is reluctant to make a complete switch to PDF workflow and submit only PDFs to printers.

BTW, thank you for explaining in detail the problems with PDF/X standard.

[Techboy]

Originally Posted by Jezza

The easiest answer is to supply untrapped 'generic' HiRes pdfs and let the printer worry about their settings.

The way things are, seems to be the printers being overly helpful, trying to make their life easier and save you some money - no tinkering at their end.

However, this clearly isn't happening. It's possible that they have differing profiles for different presses and different stock - coated/uncoated for example.

If you can get a settings instruction on the job ticket then that would be helpful, though I fear it's unlikely.

I only wish it's this easy... I'm already told most of our domestic printers will not work with our files if they are submitted wrong. So a generic hires PDF likely wont work for all of our printers, if preflight fail on their automatic system, we get an automatic kickback. It's more time wasted if this is an oversea printer.

I also doubt the printers are trying to save us money. One printer's website was still using Quark 4-5 PDF settings when we recently made the jump to Quark 7 (we still have 6.5). Screenshots that were suppose to help me setup to their specs are completely different and off.

Another reason why a generic hi-res PDF won't work is that I already have one printer asking us to set trapping/overprint for them. I had to re-submit the same PDFs multiple times because they can't seem to add trim marks on their own. They can't set trapping from their system. Which makes me wonder how many more of our printers shares the same technical problems.

I like your idea of putting PDF setting instruction on a job ticket/per project. However it's still not too practical nor efficient at this point. Regardless, I still need to instruct our art dept of 6 + freelancers to use all the varies settings. I can just see heads roll when I start showing them all the stuffs I have been trying to setup.

Just a day ago, one designer was asking me why we need to resize an image that was scaled to 20% in the layout. My simple answer was "it's inefficient to have printers process something that was only used 20%". I don't think he fully understood why it's his problem to setup his file correctly and efficiently. Old school designers still think it's printers responsibility to make things work and look pretty for them.

This bring me back to PDF workflow... end user errors, shipping out wrong PDFs to printers and receiving kickbacks is something we need to avoid at all cost. High expectations with no easy answer right now. I have a feeling any outgoing PDFs to printers will have to funnel through me eventually. I can't see my boss agreeing to have art dept doing it. Honestly, neither can I right now.

[Jezza]

Originally Posted by Techboy

I had to re-submit the same PDFs multiple times because they can't seem to add trim marks on their own.

I know how you feel, just last week I had a pdf kicked back and was asked to remove the crop marks. I said to the sales guy - "You're taking the effing p**s aren't you?" Sadly he wasn't.

May be I'm lucky, but I've been sending untrapped pdf's for years. My last company stored them in a central location and then any of our printers around the world could pull down the file to meet deadline/surge/delivery requirements.

[Joe]

Originally Posted by Techboy

I only wish it's this easy... I'm already told most of our domestic printers will not work with our files if they are submitted wrong. So a generic hires PDF likely wont work for all of our printers, if preflight fail on their automatic system, we get an automatic kickback. It's more time wasted if this is an oversea printer.

I have to say...you have some pretty arrogant and picky printers. Or you are just too accommodating. I wish we could be so choosy. We take all PDF's and MAKE them work unless we just flat can't open them for some reason. We do make suggestions for PDF creation but have pretty much given up on requiring certain specifications.

[mattbeals]

I have to agree with joe. you have to start dictating toy your printers to bring some sanity to your workflow. more than anything that's what you have to do.

as for the flattener settings the "high reolution" settings work well. the problem is that you've got too many opinions about what is "right".

there is nothing wrong with the pdf/x standards. in fact they are really what you *want*. the problrm with pdf/x-1a is with how adobe forces you to a cmyk color space. the actual standard says nothing about "only being cmyk". rather it allows cmyk, device-n and device gray or any combination of those three as long as there is an outpit intent describing the output color space.

iso standards are where you need to be. if you're putting that much work out there then it's time to start flexing tour economix muscle; i.e. tour check book.

a pdf/x based workflow can be achieved even with foreign prineters. that' the whole point of pdf/x!!!!

you will probably need some 3rd party tools to make it as efficient as possible. i'd love to discuss this with you and you boss. call me when yiu get a chance.

[Gregg]

Great post! And everytime I read one of your post's Techboy I realize how similar our jobs, and the issues we run into are.

I share you frustration with every print vendor having their own set of custom distiller settings (not to mention .ps settings). We have about 8 US vendors and, 1 in Mexico, 1 in Italy and several in the Far East. About 3 years ago I tried to do the right thing and contact all of them to get their custom settings (both PDF and PS). So there I was with a ridiculously long list of job options and about 3 reams of paper explaining each printers PS settings. I never bothered to pay attention to the PS settings, I just looked for the similarities and stuck with that (12 pt offset for crops, 1" or 30mm larger paper size than the actual trim, things like that). I did however make sure I ripped every PS to the proper job option. Then the bottlenecking began to take place. Not always did I know the printer for a specific job that I was prepping, so I would have to contact the production controller and get that info. If they were out, or away from their desk, it just meant time lost. So I created my own Distiller settings and had all of our printers agree to use them. It took a while for all the vendors to get back to me with the agreement but it made my life so much easier. As Matt mentioned, the Press Quality setting is good, that is actually the setting that most of my Asian printers prefer. All of the custom setting are usually just a minor tweak to that (image compression, font subset, things like that).

As Joe and Matt mentioned, you need to dictate a little to the printer, you want to adhere to their guidelines as much as possible, but if it is unreasonable then try to come to a middle ground with them. If they are not willing to work with you on it, then find another printer. Especially, as you mention, the printer that cannot do their own trapping!!! I set my own overprints, but as far as CT to LW trapping I leave that up to the printer.

Techboy, I too (well me and my assistant), are the ones that rips all the PDFs, flightchecks all the files etc. (on top of a million other things!!). I actually prefer it. At the end of the day, if you are the one who is responsible for the files being sent to the printer than it is best that you are the one creating those files. Let the designers focus on being creative, we are here to do the techwork.