ID -> PDF; how to optomize file size?

[morea]

I am working on a flyer that measures 8.5 x 11", printing 4CP/0 with full bleeds.

There are 5 photos anda textured background on the flyer that were set up in Photoshop (version 7 for PC). The photos are set up at the correct print size at 300 dpi.

The file is set up in ID version 2 for PC, and when I export it as a pdf it is still 14MB. I would like to make the file smaller without losing any quality, and I could use some advice if anyone has any tips.

The settings I am currently using:

General: I select "press"

Compression:

color bmp images: bicubic downsample to 300dpi
compression: automatic
quality: maximum

grayscale bmp: bicubic downsample to 300dpi
compression: automatic
quality: maximum

monochrome bmp: bicubic downsample to 1200dpi
compression: ccitt group 4

I unchecked "compress text and line art," but it defaults to checked.

Advanced: color - CMYK
Transparency flattener - high res

Anybody got any ideas?

[morea]

btw, I have saved the images as tif files, and they are huge (like 5 MB each).

would the quality suffer if I save them as Photoshop PDF or even (gasp) jpg files?
I did remember to flatten the images before placing them. (I still have the layered files saved separately though.)

[emel]

Are the photos in ID 'to scale', that is to ask are you resizing any of the placed images? Resize them to the exact height/width before placing them in ID. Try and make sure all your placed images (background included) are at 100% height/width.

That may knock some of the file size down.

[morea]

unfortunately the images are set up at 300 dpi at actual print size.

As for the textured background, I even split that into 1/4ths so I can place the same file 4 times instead of the one huge file... but that didn't seem to help much either.

[emel]

or even (gasp) jpg files?Maybe worth a shot. I have used high resolution jpgs before placed in documents and they turned out fine.

[emel]

Hmm. Are you working with a bunch of transparencies? If so you may try to rasterize them before creating the PDF?

[morea]

no transparencies, and I even tried flattening the ID document, to no avail.

also tried rebuilding it in ID using high res jpgs, and I am still ending up with a file that is 13.5 MB.

I wonder if it would work better if I ran it through Distiller instead of exporting as a pdf... but I don't have distiller here. Ack.

[Kool]

14 megs is about right for this file. I wouldn't go the jpg route. I don't think you are gonna get it any smaller without taking the res down and you don't want to do that.

[morea]

the "packaged" folder for the document with the tifs is 32 MB, and that pdf comes out to 14 MB

the jpg "packaged" folder is 16 MB, and that pdf still comes out 13.5 MB! Something's screwy here.

[morea]

additionally, Friday when I was working on the same darned file I was getting a 3 MB pdf. So I am totally confused.

[morea]

okey dokie, I'd rather be safe than sorry as far as the quality goes.

Guess I'll be sending a cd instead of emailing the file! :D

[Kool]

You shouldn't need to include the tiffs packaged with the pdf. you are in effect sending them twice.

[morea]

nah, the math just seemed off to me.

I only planned to send the pdf, but my blasted connection doesn't handle much more than 5 MB at a time.

[emel]

Distiller may get rid of superflous PostScript, but I have a sneaking hunch that ID is quietly using a form of distiller in the background, even if you don't have it installed separately.

I am a novice ID user though so I am guessing there.

[morea]

I hear that! I've only been on ID for a few months myself. Live and learn. :rolleyes:

[Broacher]

ID's PDF export does indeed have its own 'Distiller' but it's not as efficient as the full version. Question: how much transparency is there going on in this thing?

That thing about using a duplicate image to reduce file size -- yep, it is nuts that ID doesn't recognize this on export. It's the same with something on a master page. ID just treats each copy as a new one. Wish they'd fix this.

[Eggles1]

>>ID's PDF export does indeed have its own 'Distiller' but it's not as efficient as the full version. <<

Bob

Does this mean that if you purchase CS2, there is really no need to buy the Premium version if you don't need all the bells and whistles of Acrobat 7? or GoLive for that matter (difference between std and pro versions is just that the std version doesn't include acrobat and Golive). That is, if you have an older copy of Acrobat (like v5) that can do the basics - separate to Distiller - like security, adding/deleting/rotating pages, text touchup and so on, the export to PDF function of ID is quite adequate?

When you say that it is not as efficient, do you mean the final file size of the PDF or something else?

[Broacher]

Sorry Lyn, I mean that the distiller that InDesign uses is internal to the program. It doesn't have all the switches and features that the full version that you get with the Acrobat package has. Or...even that Distiller 5 or even 4 has. Though, you have to be aware of the issues of the older versions (transparency support, CID font embedding differences, etc.). And yes, in efficient, I'm referring to the file size.

I've got Acrobat 6 Full Pro, but I still use Acr5 for lots of handoff work--particularly if I need to use a plugin that I only have for the earlier version. My favourite Acr6 add on feature has to be the separations preview.

[Eggles1]

So you are saying with ID, it is better to use the two-step method (distill the postscript) if you are handing off the PDF to a printer?

I have recently entered the 21st century and upgraded to ID2, and have been using the export to PDF (which I never used with PM) from ID. It's so fast! I used a drop shadow on some boxed text (can't resist those 'kewl' new features) and sent the PDF to the client for aproval. One of the committee that had to approve the publication said they just got a black box behind the text so it was unreadable when opened in Reader. Is this an issue to do with older versions of Reader? No-one else had the same problem with the PDF apparently. This is one of those transparency support problems isn't it? I wondered if I used a white fill in the box behind which I put the sahdow, the problem would go away? Or if I used the 2-step method with my Distiller 5, would the same problem occur if I didn't fill the box? I have just realised it probably sounds stupid not to have filled the box if I was going to have a drop shadow behind it, but the text in the box was just a few lines in a large size and I quite liked the effect of being able to see the drop shadow on all sides of the box. But perhaps I should fill the box anyway - the effect may have been a bit too radical for the readers (newsletter for retirees).

[imagemaker]

Morea;

My bet is on the high resolution keeping the file size high. For proofing, you could make a lower resolution to e-mail, and advise them that it IS lower resolution for transporting purposes only. For your final you could try using Stuffit or Zip to compress the archive, or you can ftp it to your site with a unique url. Then send the url to your printer. He can access it and download the files. No 'mail' issues to deal with at all. Once he has the file, you can pull it back off the site to open more space.

P.S.-Chelsea (actually Chel-don't-see is more appropriate) is adapting wonderfully. She jumps onto the bed, couch, and even up onto the back of the couch. She can't see out the window, but can feel the heat and sun. I've belled the other two cats, so she can hear where they are, and that has helped greatly in reducing the 'surprise/hiss' syndrome. I’ve belled myself so that she knows where the ‘big’ cat is, too. I wear a small collar on my wrist so she can hear when I reach out to pet her or pick her up, as well as knowing when I enter or leave a room. The neatest so far has been watching the other cats discover her blindness-getting nose to nose, intently peering into her eyes as they sway back and forth in front of her and question the lack of response.

What a charm!

Sorry for the tangent.

[morea]

it's great to hear about your progress with her...sounds like she is fitting in wonderfully, and already has the rest of her housemates wrapped around her little paw!

It's great to hear a "happy" rescue story!

[rickself]

I have recently entered the 21st century and upgraded to ID2, and have been using the export to PDF (which I never used with PM).

WOW!! :eek: :eek: :eek:
If prepress people like myself could hear that statement once a day, it could have the appearance of change for the good. You wouldn't believe the numbers of people still using RageMaker 6.0! And they wonder why duotones don't print properly.

In 15 years of digital prepress, I've always advised designers to provide the native file firsthand, and if not possible, THEN create the pdf by first postscripting.

And on a slightly different angle, EVERY designer could make any prepress person's day by calling first and getting answers before you are in too deep with a project.

Rick