Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Prepress-ready PDFs

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange <bieler@worldnet.att.net>
    Here is a link to a recent article on creating prepress-ready PDF files. Brian Allen has suggested that this may be the best format in which to send your
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 4, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Here is a link to a recent article on creating prepress-ready PDF
      files. Brian Allen has suggested that this may be the best format in
      which to send your files to the service bureau as the output may be a
      bit more refined (according to an Adobe rep). I can't remember the
      exact context of the information. Perhaps Brian would care to comment
      further.

      http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/18736.html?cprose=4-05

      Gerald
    • Paul W Romaine <romaine@pipeline.com>
      Thanks, Gerald This is very helpful. Adobe s documentation (what documentation?!) with Acrobat 5 is so skimpy that you wouldn t know the differences between
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 4, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks, Gerald

        This is very helpful. Adobe's documentation (what documentation?!)
        with Acrobat 5 is so skimpy that you wouldn't know the differences
        between Distiller and Writer.

        Interestingly, the book _The Adobe InDesign Guide_ (Hayden, 2000), by
        Mark Witkowski and Trish Boyle, describes a composite PDF-based
        workflow (pp. 317 ff.). Seems like a good book. I wouldn't say that
        Witkowski and Boyle exactly portray a pre-press future that's so
        bright that you'll need sunglasses, but there are elements of that.
        It's great to have everything in one file and automate a lot of the
        checks. It's convenient to have the ability to save as PDF for
        printing and re-save with lower res for web or CD distribution. As
        they write: "The key to this file transfer [from designer to printer]
        is the PDF file. This is the file that the designer looked at,
        proofed, and accepted before transfer. The PDF file format will
        include all image data and fonts. It is also highly standardized so
        that output to several devices will not vary on the incoming data." I
        wonder, though. On Amazon'd feedback for InDesign I saw one person's
        complaints about sluggishness of ID compared to Quark on a RIP. Any
        thoughts? (I realize that this somewhat departs from PPP, but I'm
        dealing with a PP printer who uses Quark and doesn't like PDF.)

        And from a librarian/conservation perspective (my own), PDF is a
        problematic format for archiving as long as it remains proprietary and
        subject to change. Anyone try to open some WordStar or MS-Word for DOS
        files lately?

        Best,
        Paul

        Paul W. Romaine
        http://home.pipeline.com/~romaine
      • Brian Allen
        I mentioned in a message to Gerald a few weeks ago that we (Agfa Monotype font group) had hired recently hired a former Adobe Type department who told me that
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 4, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          I mentioned in a message to Gerald a few weeks ago that we (Agfa Monotype
          font group) had hired recently hired a former Adobe Type department who told
          me that they had discovered that type embedded in pdf files seemed to image
          a little thinner than the same type sent separately, with a file, to a
          service bureau. They apparently never found out why. The difference is
          minute, I'm sure. But it could be seen as a small and unexpected aid in
          photopolymer derived letterpress work.
          Brian
          ----------
          on 2/4/03 10:08 AM, Gerald Lange <bieler@...> at
          bieler@... wrote:

          >
          > Here is a link to a recent article on creating prepress-ready PDF
          > files. Brian Allen has suggested that this may be the best format in
          > which to send your files to the service bureau as the output may be a
          > bit more refined (according to an Adobe rep). I can't remember the
          > exact context of the information. Perhaps Brian would care to comment
          > further.
          >
          > http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/18736.html?cprose=4-05
          >
          > Gerald
          >
          >
          >
          > • To respond to a post or post a message to the membership:
          > PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
          > • Encountering problems? contact:
          > PPLetterpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
          > • To unsubscribe:
          > PPLetterpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
        • Paul W. Romaine
          Brian- Thanks on these fascinating comments on PDF. I m working on a photopolymer keepsake using Matthew Carter s soon-to-be released Monticello and Carter
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 5, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Brian-
            Thanks on these fascinating comments on PDF. I'm working on a photopolymer
            keepsake using Matthew Carter's soon-to-be released "Monticello" and Carter
            provided a thinned version because he knew we would be doing letterpress.
            Carter specifically cited Gerald's comments on "Manutius/Miller" in
            _Printing History_ 42 (Volume XXI, No. 2).

            Best,
            Paul

            > Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 21:38:11 -0800
            > From: Brian Allen <allenprinter@...>
            >Subject: Re: Prepress-ready PDFs
            >
            >I mentioned in a message to Gerald a few weeks ago that we (Agfa Monotype
            >font group) had hired recently hired a former Adobe Type department who told
            >me that they had discovered that type embedded in pdf files seemed to image
            >a little thinner than the same type sent separately, with a file, to a
            >service bureau. They apparently never found out why. The difference is
            >minute, I'm sure. But it could be seen as a small and unexpected aid in
            >photopolymer derived letterpress work.
            >Brian



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Phillip Driscoll
            Is this related to Linotype s face called Monticello ? --Phillip Driscoll ... From: Paul W. Romaine To:
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 5, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              Is this related to Linotype's face called "Monticello"?

              --Phillip Driscoll

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Paul W. Romaine" <romaine@...>
              To: <PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 8:49 AM
              Subject: [PPLetterpress] Re: Prepress-ready PDFs


              Brian-
              Thanks on these fascinating comments on PDF. I'm working on a photopolymer
              keepsake using Matthew Carter's soon-to-be released "Monticello" and Carter
              provided a thinned version because he knew we would be doing letterpress.
              Carter specifically cited Gerald's comments on "Manutius/Miller" in
              _Printing History_ 42 (Volume XXI, No. 2).

              Best,
              Paul
            • Gerald Lange <bieler@worldnet.att.net>
              ... Phillip Here is a URL that will provide some information: http://printinghistory.org/htm/news/national/carter-creesy.htm The Carter face is based on a
              Message 6 of 8 , Feb 5, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                wrote:
                > Is this related to Linotype's face called "Monticello"?
                >
                > --Phillip Driscoll

                Phillip

                Here is a URL that will provide some information:

                http://printinghistory.org/htm/news/national/carter-creesy.htm

                The Carter face is based on a Binny & Ronaldson, which was later the
                inspiration for the Linotype. I don't know if Linotype had previously
                issued this in digital form.

                Gerald
              • Paul W Romaine <romaine@pipeline.com>
                Phillip, Yes! It s more than related to the Linotype Monticello type. Princeton University press commissioned a digital version from Matthew Carter and it
                Message 7 of 8 , Feb 5, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  Phillip,
                  Yes! It's more than related to the Linotype "Monticello" type.
                  Princeton University press commissioned a digital version from Matthew
                  Carter and it will be licensed through Linotype. Should be out soon.

                  "Monticello" is based upon Binny & Ronaldson's Roman no. 1 and ATF's
                  "Oxford" (itself an adaption of B&R's Roman). It was named
                  "Monticello" in tribute to Jefferson, who wrote approvingly of the B&R
                  type in an 1822 letter. The American Printing History Association) has
                  asked Carter and Charles Creesy from Princeton to speak about the
                  history and adapation of the type at a Feb 25 lecture in New York at
                  the Grolier Club. Details at the APHA website
                  http://www.printinghistory.org/

                  Best,
                  Paul
                  (who is also VP for Membership for APHA)


                  --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, "Phillip Driscoll" <phild@a...>
                  wrote:
                  > Is this related to Linotype's face called "Monticello"?
                  >
                  > --Phillip Driscoll
                  >
                • Paul W Romaine <romaine@pipeline.com>
                  Gerald, Sorry for duplication in responses. I don t know if Linotype had previously digitized. I understand that Princeton University Press had a crude
                  Message 8 of 8 , Feb 5, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Gerald,
                    Sorry for duplication in responses.

                    I don't know if Linotype had previously digitized. I understand that
                    Princeton University Press had a "crude Postscript version" for TyX
                    setting, which was "unruly in Windows." Originally intended for
                    proofing, PUP had produced the last few volumes of the Jefferson
                    Papers in it because they had no alternative. I guess they could have
                    switched to Bell or a similar Scotch Roman, or, more likely a Caslon
                    or Baskerville.

                    Matthew told me that he started with... oh, wait for the lecture. It's
                    wonderful to hear how he used rare books to inform his re-working of
                    his starting material.

                    Best,
                    Paul

                    --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Lange <bieler@w...>"
                    <bieler@w...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Here is a URL that will provide some information:
                    >
                    > http://printinghistory.org/htm/news/national/carter-creesy.htm
                    >
                    > The Carter face is based on a Binny & Ronaldson, which was later the
                    > inspiration for the Linotype. I don't know if Linotype had
                    previously
                    > issued this in digital form.
                    >
                    > Gerald
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.