View Full Version : Direct PDF import useless?

02-20-2013, 12:07 AM

I'm using an IC-413 (E100) controller to drive my KM C6000 and the technicians told me that a direct import of PDF files into CWS is the best and safest way to go. In the past years, I always used Acrobat to print the jobs but importing them directly sounds quite comfortable to me (and that's maybe the only way to get Impose work with bleed).

But after some test rounds I found that this workflow is really unreliable:

- if PDF uses some non- or not correctly embedded fonts, the font gets substituted without any error or warning; works fine if printing out of Acrobat

- transparency flattening is really unpredictable and often produces drop shadows where Acrobat seems to do some more "work"

This Fiery hasn't the APPE option and so I guess, the direct import feature isn't quite useable on those devices nowadays, is it?

02-22-2013, 09:52 AM
To say importing is useless probably depends on your workflow. I'd say my normal usage is importing (drag & drop) files into the Fiery 90% of the time. I also have many customers who use hot folders with great success which is just an extension of the importing functionality.

Obviously if the fonts are not embedded in the PDF you will have issues. From my side since I did not create the file, the chances are that I do not have the fonts on my desktop either, I'd have font issues either way.

On the up side importing the PDF does make it easier if the file is of "native size" for example a business card PDF 2.25"x3.75" with 1/8" bleeds. Importing the file gives me this size directly. However with the current version of CWS/Impose you can print the file centered on standard size paper and use the Finish Size selection to adjust the imposed section to fit your needs so this is less of a problem than it used to be.

As for transparency flattening obviously you are best off using the "Composite Overprint" option on the color tab, which in my experience resolves many of those issues, but I rarely see this make much difference in jobs sent via the driver compared to imported so your issues could be different.

In the end thats why its nice to have the options of printing and importing. What works well for me may cause headaches for you.

02-22-2013, 10:00 AM
Thanks for your detailed answer!

Yes, I would also like to use the direct import function more often but it seems that the Fiery's really have some problems regarding some fonts. After taking a closer look, the Fiery really seems to fail on using some kind of embedded fonts. I mean, I have imported a PDF and run the pre-flight function in CWS. It complained about a missing font (some kind of Helvetica). Then I checked the PDF in Acrobat and there, every single font subset was embedded. Some as TrueType, some as CID, but everything embedded!

Of course, if my customers really use special (non-embedded) fonts, then printing out of Acrobat will fail, too, but in the past years, I've never received a file which won't use correct fonts if printed out of Acrobat ... but fails when imported directly to the Fiery :-(

02-26-2013, 08:53 AM
Can you post the sample PDF where we can try it?



03-04-2013, 10:44 AM
APPE print engine wether direct import/hot folder is not as reliable in my workflows, although I use this a lot due to the nature of our printing fulfillment environment. The only advantage I can see is the APPE has a very good color interpretation on the print output as oppose to using the conventional postcript printing method.
"Optimize RGB" and "Composite overprint" selection may work or not depending on the creation of the source file.
We have EX1000 print engine with Fiery 5.4 installed.

I am hoping that APPE will have improvements someday regarding transparecy/layer issue.