Color separation when exporting a PDF

[tranceplantt]

It's been driving me nuts, ADOBE seems to have forgotten about color separation when using the export to PDF method.  Even quark has this option.

Anyway I was hoping to know if there is a way that I don't know.

Cheers

[BobLevine]

Be thankful those people are designing books and not using power tools.

[tranceplantt]

Bob Levine wrote:

Be thankful those people are designing books and not using power tools.

I have no control over it... many agencies do that. It use to be the old way of doing things. People still work that way and I can't stress this enough, if my firm buys a book that has been done 5 years ago what should I do? Re-do the whole work?

Besides, Adobe should be here to help and not tell me how to work... a simple separation option on export would be great and not that hard to do... little secret.... Quark is doing it!

[BobLevine]

Well, as a work around have you tried placing the PDFs into Quark and exporting from there?

[tranceplantt]

Bob Levine wrote:

Well, as a work around have you tried placing the PDFs into Quark and exporting from there?

well for now I just use the postscript method.

[tranceplantt]

PDF pass-through printing

PDF Print Engine printer manufactures release new drivers based on Adobe PDFDriver SDK which have the capabilities of handling PDF in the pass-through mode. When such a printer is selected via InDesign, its PPD can indicate that it is a PDF printer (depends on the Printer manufacturer).

Since InDesign can generate a high-quality PDF via PDF export, printing to a PDF printer leverages that functionality, and this high quality PDF is passed on to the printer, rather than via intermediate postscript route.
In general, print quality from applications through PDF Driver is equivalent to (or better than) PostScript printing. PDF printing through the Adobe PDF printer also supports live transparency and ICC color management. At InDesign print dialog, options related to Color Management, Color Separation, and Graphics options are disabled because all the color management operations are done on the device for better quality printout.

I found this on this page: InDesign Help | Preparing PDFs for service providers

Does someone have more information on this method?

I have not find a way on how to do that?  Seems like I can generate a PDF via printer without using postscript? Help please

or should I start a new topic?

[rob day]

At InDesign print dialog, options related to Color Management, Color Separation, and Graphics options are disabled

The help text states that separations are disabled so it doesn't sound like it would help.

Besides, Adobe should be here to help and not tell me how to work... a simple separation option on export would be great

It doesn't seem like Adobe will have any interest in a print feature that addresses a layout problem. The InDesign SDK and scripting tools make this very solvable from the layout rather than the print side. I didn't spend much time with the script I posted and it probably would have problems with complex groups, but there are other ways of going at the problem. A script could also hide every page item that isn't a text frame containing text with the 5th color. That might be better because it wouldn't change the layout structure.

[tranceplantt]

Rob Day wrote:

It doesn't seem like Adobe will have any interest in a print feature that addresses a layout problem. The InDesign SDK and scripting tools make this very solvable from the layout rather than the print side.

Who says it's a problem in the layout. The layout is fine.  Just the way it has been done.   Separating the colours on output is simply an option.  What if I wanted to output just the CYAN? I couldn't even do that other than on the screen.

[rob day]

What if I wanted to output just the CYAN? I couldn't even do that other than on the screen.

Right, but I think Dov is speaking for Adobe; they consider separated workflows to be a thing of the past, so you are not going to get the feature you want via the export dialog. There really would be little use for exporting a single process plate to make a page correction. But your argument for exporting spot text is valid and it could be solved via scripting or an extension inside of the layout without getting into the print engine.

[rob day]

If you are using OSX try this AppleScript:

http://www.zenodesign.com/forum/ExportSpotPlate.zip

Lets you choose a spot color, hides anything that isn't text filled with the chosen color, exports a PDF, and resets. I haven't tried it on a long doc, but it doesn't change any of the page items so it's probably safer that moving things to layers. If there's process color text mixed in with the spot color text, it does not get hidden so you have to watch out for that.

[rob day]

Besides, why would I send the printer a 2gig file of all the pictures when I can send a 2 mb files of just the text?  Again, lots of time saved.

There's also a one line script that would hide all graphics which would run faster on a big doc  and solve your file size problem:

tell application "Adobe InDesign CS6"

    set visible of all graphics of active document to false

end tell

[tranceplantt]

Rob Day wrote:

Besides, why would I send the printer a 2gig file of all the pictures when I can send a 2 mb files of just the text?  Again, lots of time saved.

There's also a one line script that would hide all graphics which would run faster on a big doc  and solve your file size problem:

tell application "Adobe InDesign CS6"

    set visible of all graphics of active document to false

end tell

I would prefer not to use scripts. They don't always work exactly how you want them.

Thanks for the answer.

[rob day]

They don't always work exactly how you want them

Right you wouldn't want to run any script in production without testing, but not much could go wrong with the one line hide graphics script because there are no conditions—it's either on or off. It would be a simple way of exporting a text only PDF

[Dov Isaacs]

The PDF Pass-Through Printing feature of InDesign 10.1 is designed for printing directly to RIPs and DFEs (Digital Front Ends for digital printers) that support native PDF consumption (not through conversion of PDF to PostScript) using the Adobe PDF Print Engine technology and that have a custom driver created using a special Adobe PDF printer driver SDK. This feature provides a shortcut for printing that is the logical equivalent of exporting a very high quality PDF and manually submitting that PDF file to the PDF RIP.

This functionality does not create pre-separated PDF or otherwise resolve the needs of the original posting.

          - Dov

[FloppyDisc]

I realize this thread is 2 years old but I wanted to let you know that I feel your pain, tranceplantt. I also work in publishing and we do a great deal of work with foreign publishers. We are still very much using a separation based workflow, and have the need for Text only PDFs on a daily basis. I'm sure I get as equally frustrated as you with the lack of understanding and often ignorance of the replies to your simple question regarding the ability to be able to export separations.

I stumbled upon this post while searching for info about Quark 2015. I have, unfortunately, just discovered that Quark has removed the export separations functionality from Q10 and above. I have been using Q9 and the ability to export seps was, in my opinion, the last saving grace for Quark.

In the 2 years since you made this original post, has your workflow changed?

[rob day]

In the 2 years since you made this original post, has your workflow changed?

Dan's #10 is the proper—and not very difficult—workflow. Exporting plates is never going to happen, so the only other options are Distiller or a script.

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

Add Enfocus PitStop Pro or PitStop Server to that list of possible options.

[FloppyDisc]

The problem with Dan's options are that it is not possible to have a multi-language document. The "master" file is distributed, at or around the same time, to numerous countries. The option to share a file can't happen.

Scripts and Distiller are also a problem as we are dealing with some publishers that aren't as technologically advanced as others. They may not have a tech person on staff and would not understand how to use scripts or create .PS files. In some cases, we have publishers still using CS4. I mention this just to show you the global picture we deal with.

[BobLevine]

I find it ironic that you’re using what can only be referred to as an archaic workflow and talking about “publishers that aren't as technologically advanced as others.”

[FloppyDisc]

The workflow is a result of working with publisher's from all over the globe. I don't know any publisher (big or small) that doesn't work this way. Who cares if it is archaic if it works.

[rob day]

The option to share a file can't happen.

So you have separate documents, but in all cases the text is set as an extra spot color right? If the document is simply exported as PDF/X-4 the printer will receive a PDF with the spot plate and it would just be a matter of printing that plate and ignoring the CMYK plates. Unless you are suggesting the printers don't have Acrobat?

Having the CMYK plates along with the extra text separation would surely be an advantage—the printer would be able easily to see that the publisher (with few InDesign skills) had inadvertently set some text on the Black plate

[FloppyDisc]

Correct, in all cases the text is set as a extra spot color. No, I am not suggesting the printers don't have Acrobat. Sending a PDF/X-4 file could work, however the PDFs will be larger in size. Worth noting, 4/c raster links are not supplied to the foreign publishers, unless there is a text spot-channel involved.

While I won't speak for tranceplantt, I bet he/she also feels that frustration lies with the fact that exporting seps seems like a easy option to include. Heck, Quark had it for a long time. The instant response of "that's archaic" is narrow-minded and not taking into consideration the industries that would benefit from the option.

We've all managed, and will continue to make it work. I basically came to terms with this years ago, but the fire was re-stoked when I learned that Quark did a away with export seps functionality as well. A lot of our way-backlist titles are in Quark and we used the export seps feature to handle reprints all the time. It was such a time saver. Bummed that it is gone.

[BobLevine]

Narrow-minded? No, there’s nothing narrow-minded about it.

It is trying to hold on to those archaic workflows and failing to realize that time marches on that is narrow-minded. If Quark’s done away with it as well, shouldn’t that tell you something?

[rob day]

however the PDFs will be larger in size. Worth noting, 4/c raster links are not supplied to the foreign publishers, unless there is a text spot-channel involved.

As others have noted that's just a matter of setting the text on its own layer and hiding the others before exporting. Using layers is a beginner level ID skill.

[FloppyDisc]

Yes, text is always on it's own layer, and image text (hand-lettered raster, or vector text as links) are on their own layer as well.

The only time when turning off the Art layer option doesn't work is when there is a Photoshop file with a spot channel that either includes text, or has a spot area in which text knocks out. This is where export seps would really come in handy.

[DrunkRabbit]

I know, I know... old post...

What struck me most about the posts from Bob Levine and Adobe is their arrogance.

Calling something archaic does not dismiss an actual need, it is just derogatory.

Powerful software is about having options.  Don't babysit me.  If I want to create host-based seps then let me! Obviously there is a need, so Adobe's inability to be able to perform that function makes it inherently less powerful, and less useful.  That is a failure - no matter how you justify it.