Creating a rasterized or otherwise uneditable PDF (using an action)

[stoppeddown.studio]

Hi all,

I'm searching for the best (read: fastest) way to output a PDF that can't be edited meaningfully by clients. We sometimes outline and export, but my boss prefers to output a raster PDF. Before I got here, they've done this by exporting a PDF, then opening and saving it in Photoshop. Alternatively, they've saved off a PNG, placed it in the same AI document, then saved that as a PDF.

I've been building a few actions to speed this process along. The first just automates the PNG-PDF process I described above. The latter uses the Rasterize command:

When this action works (it sometimes fails to hide all other layers, which can derail the whole process), it works brilliantly. One click, and a few seconds later I'm saving my file. But at least 50% of the time, it produces this:

You'll have to trust me that the artwork I rasterized doesn't look like this; There's a LOT of artwork here that isn't showing up.

I've verified many times over that Rasterize is making an image—AI reads it as an image, and PS can read it fine—and I've tried a dozen different PDF settings. Any ideas what could be causing this?

Thanks so much!

Adam

[CHMprepress]

maybe bit out of topic, but why would you really bother to make a image pdf to deliver to a client.

There are a lot of cons by doing this and I really don't see the reason why.

Do your clients even have the right tools to be able to adjust pdf files? They need something like Acrobat Pro to do this for example.

You can also pasword protect you pdf's, and lock de edit possibilities. If this is really needed.

[stoppeddown.studio]

All—

The decision to send the PDFs this way is out of my hands. (When I freelance, I send fully editable PDFs.) Just looking for a little insight into why rasterizing and exporting to a PDF could produce something unrecognizable. As we do this constantly—on large jobs, I could be responsible for creating 40 or 50 PDFs—my interest isn't in shaving off a few seconds, but two other things:

1. I don't want to think about this. The concentration I put into getting each PDF perfect is energy I could be putting into design.

2. I don't want to lose that concentration and screw up one or more of those PDFs.

Thanks again.

[John Mensinger]

stoppeddownstudio  wrote

All—

The decision to send the PDFs this way is out of my hands.

Yeah, I think that was understood clearly enough. I wouldn't say the responses here were so much alleging that you were making a bad decision (it is indeed a bad decision, but we see it's not yours), as much as trying to convey an underlying message to this effect: You're looking for a solution to a problem that you're also creating . . . unnecessarily. In that sense, no one works out good solutions to such problems—it's better just to avoid creating the problem in the first place.

Or, in another context, if you've created an action that batch-rasterizes full layouts, then saves them as PDF, and it fails in some way about half the time, it's really not that surprising. It's a rather non-standard workflow, and not what Actions were meant to do; at least not to an appreciable level of reliability. Potentially, there are many variables in those layouts, from non-outline-able fonts, to overprints, transparency interactions, and live effects, for instance. It may not be possible that one single rasterization routine can get them all correct in any number of attempts.

Again, without question, it would be the smarter, better course of action to discontinue the practice and implement a less disruptive method of protecting the files. Perhaps you should show this thread to your boss.

[stoppeddown.studio]

Hi John,

My supervisors and I have discussed it, and this is how they want it done. This is the context I have to work in, and the context from which I'm asking for help.

Your explanation of why the Rasterize command may not be able to reliably produce what I need is very helpful, however, and I appreciate it! If Rasterize can't reliably rasterize, no matter what it's given (where Photoshop can, just by opening the same Illustrator file), I'll seek another tool.

Thanks again.

[John Mensinger]

stoppeddownstudio  wrote

But at least 50% of the time, it produces this:

Any ideas what could be causing this?

Adam,

I seriously doubt anyone here will find enough information in your post to facilitate otherwise-blind troubleshooting of your problem. Frankly, your description of the situation comes off like a lot of time spent trying to save very little time, all because of some paranoid practices established as "normal" before your time in the job. I apologize for editorializing, but if the clients are really so untrustworthy (it shouldn't be assumed they all are; if I was one receiving this treatment, I'd fire your firm), there are better ways to protect your IP than this silly exercise.

[DaveJCummings]

Exactly.  In my day job as a designer,  sometimes I get PDFs like that from customers,  I immediately send the PDF back,  instructing them to send an unencrypted PDF,  because I can't do anything with that.

[Kurt Gold]

Apart from the objections introduced by the previous speakers, I'd mention at least a few things that may help to troubleshoot the actual technical issue.

As per your screenshot in the initial post, it's quite obvious that you are dealing with a multi-step action consisting of not less than 15 steps. Usually, playing back multi-step actions in rather complex Illustrator documents may be a bumpy ride on a potholed road. Various things can go wrong, including unwanted deletions of objects, inaccurate calculations, ignored action steps and some other unforeseeable breakdowns.

The misbehaviour can often be cured by changing the Performance settings to "Step by Step" or "Pause for […] seconds" instead of "Accelerated" (see Playback Options in the Actions palette flyout menu). You may want to try and see if that helps.

If it does not help, you may provide the action file (.aia) and one of your problematic .ai files that cannot be processed reliably by the action. I or someone else can then take a look at it.

A side note: If I had to go that workflow route, I would prefer to use either Photoshop's or Acrobat's (Pro version) automation routines. Both applications provide way more robust actions to batch files.

[stoppeddown.studio]

Thanks so much, Kurt! I'll change that setting now and let you know if I see an improvement.