Do printers accept files created with CutePDF Writer / Cute PDF Pro

[BillO]

Do printers typically accept pdfs created with non-adobe options like cutepdf writer or pdf 995, etc.?

Or do you require adobe acrobat writer x now?

What sorts of glitches do you encounter when pdfs are created with non-adobe apps like cutepdf or pdf995 ghostscript pdf writers?

 

[plotter]

i create pdfs using corel draw, among others and have never had a problem printing them.
when creating a pdf in corel for example it is straightforward. (ie) rgb or cmyk ect.

 

[RichardK]

BillO - as far as I can see CutePDF "Pro" is intended for desktop printers and/or viewing onscreen. That's not to say it won't be usable, it's just that you may run into issues (particularly in litho printing) such as black text separating out to 4 colour...this is not a good thing, especially if you have used a small type size.

Since this application doesn't conform to the Adobe PDF standards you will get whatever you get depending on the printshop.

We, like many other printers, will give most files a shot but always with the proviso that if it ain't produced with professional level software then you haven't got a leg to stand on if things go wrong.

There's a good reason why these standards are in place and why software is the cost it is at the 'pro' level...and just because software has that in the title doesn't necessarily make it 'pro'.

Always go for a hardcopy contract quality proof if your job is colour critical and make sure you have dialogue with your choice of printshop. Good luck.

 

[BillO]

i create pdfs using corel draw, among others and have never had a problem printing them.
when creating a pdf in corel for example it is straightforward. (ie) rgb or cmyk ect.

Thanks very much for the reply plotter.

I'm also a coreldraw user since the old days of pentium (generation 1) and 486 cpus! I first installed it from a mountain of 3.5" floppy disks!

I see the newer versions of coreldraw have an option for PDF /X-1a in the publish to pdf menu.
Is this more compliant with the expected adobe acrobat pdf than a ghostscript pdf writer like cutepdf or pdf995?

I'm thinking I'll manually flatten (convert to bitmap) anything with transparency. Not sure if I need to worry about drop shadows and other things like that...

 

[BillO]

BillO - as far as I can see CutePDF "Pro" is intended for desktop printers and/or viewing onscreen. That's not to say it won't be usable, it's just that you may run into issues (particularly in litho printing) such as black text separating out to 4 colour...this is not a good thing, especially if you have used a small type size.

Since this application doesn't conform to the Adobe PDF standards you will get whatever you get depending on the printshop.

We, like many other printers, will give most files a shot but always with the proviso that if it ain't produced with professional level software then you haven't got a leg to stand on if things go wrong.

There's a good reason why these standards are in place and why software is the cost it is at the 'pro' level...and just because software has that in the title doesn't necessarily make it 'pro'.

Always go for a hardcopy contract quality proof if your job is colour critical and make sure you have dialogue with your choice of printshop. Good luck.

Thank you very much for the honest reply even if I'd like to hear that "free is just fine" in this case What you say makes sense. Decisions, decisions.

I don't deliver jobs to a litho press too frequently, so to be blunt, it comes down to putting $300 in adobe's pocket and negotiating that out of the printer's quote or putting it in the printer's pocket. I don't want to end up costing myself $600 of wasted proofs though because of trying to be thrifty.

> Always go for a hardcopy contract quality proof if your job is colour critical

I can test for some obvious "wrongs" by reimporting some pages of the generated pdf and checking the color of text and things like that. Also by importing the pdf into an old version of photoshop (I think) and checking with the color picker or by viewing individual channels.

When you say "hardcopy contract quality proof" can you tell me more about what kind of proof I should get from the press I work with in this day and age? Is an epson-type proof the standard? This being a totally different print technology, will issues show up in that kind of proof? With a black and white book I did I got bluelines which were great for the bw pages (and not too expensive per page) but I also got a "composite" blueline for the cover which was worthless at least to my untrained eyes for spotting any issues that would be in the color work. What kind of proof will identify weird issues that show up on press?

Thanks.

 

[RichardK]

We use an Epson 7800 together with EFi software to generate a high quality press targeted inkjet proof.

This takes the information regarding colour profiling and prints out a proof that the press will match within commercial tolerances. So basically any issues such as unexpected colour, poor resolution images etc can be caught before plates are made. Now if your document is basically mono text and a few images then perhaps this is overkill.

$300? Sound pretty good for an Adobe product...it's a one time purchase, subsequent upgrades are optional and much less expensive.

Ultimately the spend decision is down to the individual, just don't be too surprised when the result is not what you expected.

 

[BillO]

Thanks again for the advice.

$300? Sound pretty good for an Adobe product...it's a one time purchase, subsequent upgrades are optional and much less expensive.

It could be worse Their pro version with more features is $450-something.

I actually bought a version many years ago - the pro version of acrobat 4. I think this is almost certainly way too outdated now and would probably create more problems than a current free writer... not sure though (it's so old I don't qualify for an upgrade and I haven't installed it since updating my computer, twice - don't know if it would even install on a current os.)

How old is too old for acrobat to be compatible with a current press' workflow?

 

[RichardK]

How old is too old for acrobat to be compatible with a current press' workflow?

Good question! I'd always go for the latest.

But I reckon if you've got Acrobat Pro 4 you still qualify for an upgrade. The best feature of Acrobat Pro is output preview, it enables you to see each separation either in unison or one at a time. Also can catch such issues as overprint white text on coloured backgrounds (it would output as blank). So if it saves just one reprint then it's money well spent.

 

[plotter]

i usually ask for original artwork from customers, whether its done in pub, illustrator, in design, etc. we can open pretty much any original file and play with it to suit ourselves and what the customer requires. bearing in mind that most of our customers come in personally with usb pen or disk in hand, which does help considerably.

 

[Nebsy]

Differences between Adobe and Nuance pdf

Hi,

I am getting a very weird thing happaning when printing on a Xerox 560 digital press from win 7, I use bot adobe and nuance pdf now on adobe everything is fine but on nuance certain characters are missing form the printed page does anyone have any expereince or indeed an answer to this?, I looked at colour profiles but I don't fixed that one as the colours were different between the 2 any help will be really appreciated.

thanks

 

[prepress newbie]

I use bot adobe and nuance pdf now on adobe everything is fine but on nuance certain characters are missing form the printed page does anyone have any expereince or indeed an answer to this?

Maybe a font isn't embedded in the nuance pdf? Check on the pdf properties and see if all the same fonts are embedded as in the adobe pdf.

 

[prepress newbie]

I looked at colour profiles but I don't fixed that one as the colours were different between the 2 any help will be really appreciated

Thinking the color conversion settings to CMYK are different between the two outputs.

See if CMYK colors in the original application come across the same.

If so, see if native RGB or spot colors are being converted to cmyk and see if it's set to perceptual, relative, or absolute.

Otherwise see if the same output color profile is set differently.