From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/15817 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tobias Hilbricht Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: ConTeXt output & commercial printing houses: Thanks! Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:36:57 +0200 Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Message-ID: <1090913816.4166.36.camel@phoebus.venus.bay> References: <20040725125830.14364@news.comp.lancs.ac.uk> <20040724194138.GG18318@swordfish> <001501c4722e$4ca1f100$fcb359d5@DJCPX90J> <20040724194138.GG18318@swordfish> <0A30D0B7-DE21-11D8-9127-0030659899AA@fiee.net> <20040724194138.GG18318@swordfish> <20040724152139.36ca8b80@atipa.local> <20040724202504.GA9909@muisje> <20040724194138.GG18318@swordfish> <20040724152139.36ca8b80@atipa.local> <20040727061509.GB17632@swordfish> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1090913386 31823 80.91.224.253 (27 Jul 2004 07:29:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 07:29:46 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Tue Jul 27 09:29:35 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BpMP0-00061n-00 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:29:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EEE91277F; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:29:34 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ronja.vet.uu.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 08466-02; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:29:34 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741911276B; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:27:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DBB31276B for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:27:49 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ronja.vet.uu.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 08235-07 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:27:48 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from nickel.webpack.hosteurope.de (unknown [217.115.142.116]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A74F2126F8 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:27:48 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from xdsl-81-173-152-116.netcologne.de ([81.173.152.116]) by nickel.webpack.hosteurope.de with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BpMNH-0002Df-45; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:27:47 +0200 Original-To: Matt Gushee , mailing list for ConTeXt users In-Reply-To: <20040727061509.GB17632@swordfish> X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) X-HE-MXrcvd: no X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:15817 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:15817 Am Di, den 27.07.2004 schrieb Matt Gushee um 08:15: > they think that PDF > means "Adobe PDF"--i.e. they believe that Adobe software is *the* way to > produce PDF, and are mostly unaware that there is such a thing as a PDF > standard. Now, I don't fully understand the issue, but apparently Adobe > software doesn't entirely follow the published specs, whereas TeX does. > And some processing software seems to be designed specifically to work > with the quirks of Acrobat output, and sometimes has trouble with PDFTeX > output. This is also true if you want to publish advertisements in journals - the journals/newspapers often require PDF prepared by Adobe Acrobat / Distiller. If you provide advertisements prepared by other means then it is your fault if something goes wrong. This is despite the PDF/X3 standard for preprint ready PDF documents. For this reason the claim of some commercial TeX-vendors to produce PDF which comes closer to the "quirks of Acrobat output" is not worth so much in practice. However, when you prepare documents for print regularly, then it is anyway best to have "your own" printer locally at hand - somebody you can trust and who wants to keep you as a customer. Then you can deal with problems arising and talk about solutions directly. So far I did not encounter problems with PDFs made by PDFTeX, but then I gave only documents to print in black and white or with colours where it does not matter if the red or blue is slightly brighter or darker. I dont know about printing-experiences of PDFTeX-prepared documents with colour separation, spot colours, trapping ... in conjunction with various media (glossy/matte paper ...) where it becomes more difficult. Yours sincerely Tobias Hilbricht