CS4 :: Compelling Reasons to Upgrade (or Not)

[L...@adobeforums.com]

My work consists of design for web and print; photo processing, retouching, enhancements, and entering into the realm of doing some Painter work.

I am looking for compelling practical reasons why I should want to upgrade… or not. If I upgrade I will be upgrading the entire Design Suite. Photoshop will probably be the determining factor on whether to upgrade to CS4 this time around or not. I use Lightroom 2 for most of my processing so Photoshop is primarily used for specialized tasks beyond what can be done in Lightroom.

I am running CS3 on a G5 Quad, OS 10.4.11, 7GB RAM, CNVIDIA GeForce 7800GT, 256MB total VRAM.

Thank you for any objective input.

Linda

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

If there was ever a MUST upgrade Linda, it is this one.

Having tasted CS4 Design Premium Suite, I never want to have to use the CS3 Suite again.

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

Too vague Ann. She needs "reasons". :) Being she uses LR...

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

I would need to write a book on the subject!
There are major performance improvements in all of the applications.

But in one word: "BRIDGE"!

Linda uses most of the Suite — not just Lightroom.
Also, Bridge CS4 hosted ACR can now work in conjunction with Lightroom.

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

But in one word: "BRIDGE"!

I totally agree with you on Bridge, but I predict her argument is that she does not use Bridge nearly as much as LR.

Since we are talking the whole suite, one of my favorite apps to be changed is Illustrator. I just love what has happened there not to mention it is much faster.

I am glad you are saying performance is better since you both have a G5. I would expect performance increases on a Mac Pro which is what I use.

I think Linda already has the graphics card she needs too?

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Hi Ann & Cindy,

Thank you for responding so far. I can always count on you. :-)

I think Linda already has the graphics card she needs too?

Yes. Ann & I had a conversation where we determined that I do.

I totally agree with you on Bridge, but I predict her argument is that
she does not use Bridge nearly as much as LR.

This is true. I seldom use Bridge unless I am simply sorting images and moving them to folders.

I am glad you are saying performance is better since you both have a G5.

Are you saying across the board performance is better, or in specific areas? Could you elaborate?

Since we are talking the whole suite, one of my favorite apps to be changed
is Illustrator. I just love what has happened there not to mention it
is much faster.

This is good to know. I gave up on Illustrator CS3 and went back to CS2. It actually cost me a client due to bloated and bad behavior, causing me to spend way too much time, much of which caused me to have to lose much of my profit... not to mention possibly the client (previously faithful) who has not called me since.

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

I gave up on Illustrator CS3 and went back to CS2.

Why don't you run demos of the various apps when they come out? I think you will like all of them.

I don't know if you are interested in Fireworks but it now comes with the suite. Me, I like Illi so I use it for anything vector. I didn't like Illustrator CS3 either. It was too slow and unresponsive. It crashed.

[barke...@adobeforums.com]

Sorry if this feels like I am leading the thread off subject. Does anyone know what are the compatibility issues, both backward and forward between CS thro to CS4.
I find this is the major issue when considering an upgrade. i.e would someone be able to transfer files back and forth between clients, customers, freelancers etc

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

Whenever you have a newer version of any of the programs you may need to save back when sending a file to someone with an earlier version. I believe this is handled in Photoshop with a preference but anytime I have sent a file using Illustrator to someone who has an earlier version I have to save back.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

I don't know if you are interested in Fireworks but it now comes with
the suite. Me, I like Illi so I use it for anything vector. I didn't like
Illustrator CS3 either. It was too slow and unresponsive. It crashed.

Since I owned and updated the Macromedia Suite, I still have Fireworks 8. I only use it when I have to though. I too prefer Illustrator.

One thing that bothers me about the Premium upgrade is that it comes with everything for print and web design, with exception to Contribute. That to me is kind of a dumb oversight.

John, You are right on track with this topic. Please feel free to enter in as you wish. Normally the Adobe software is backward compatible. For programs such as InDesign and Illustrator you might have to save the file for backward compatibility, but generally with Photoshop you can just open the file in either version. If a feature is not backward compatible, you usually get a warning and explanation of how the document will open.

[Buko]

the biggest backward compatibility issue is InDesign You need to have all versions if you plan on working with others with older versions.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Linda this is definitely a must have

Buko, Can you give me more good reasons? I really don't want to spend the money unless it will make enough of a difference. :-)

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

You know Linda, I never really quite took to Lightroom. I liked some of the galleries but other than that I much preferred Bridge. Now that Bridge offers the same galleries (which I have yet to install all the ones from LR) there is just no contest for me. You might give Bridge/ACR a second look.

[Buko]

[L...@adobeforums.com]

I guess it's what you get used to. Now that I'm used to the workflow in LR, it really speeds things up for me. I will probably download a demo at some point, but anything and everything that takes too much time is a problem for me these days.

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

Tabs...Ever has a mess of multiple pictures all over Photoshop? Now there is tabs. What a relief. You can still move it to a new window if you like.

This suite is all about work flow. And I know that means something to you.

[Buko]

Photoshop and ID are lightyears ahead of CS3 the rest is gravy.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Tabs...Ever has a mess of multiple pictures all over Photoshop? Now there
is tabs. What a relief. You can still move it to a new window if you like.

Cindy, You mean you can tab from one image (or layer) to another, or do you mean greater flexibility with text formatting?

Photoshop and ID are lightyears ahead of CS3 the rest is gravy.

Buko, InDesign is lightyears ahead? I cannot imagine how it could get much better. Guess I should check out a tutorial at some point to see what it does. If it includes imposition, that might be of interest.

[Buko]

No imosition

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

Cindy, You mean you can tab from one image

If you open multiple images you can stack them in tabs.

Check out Whats New in InDesign:
<http://help.adobe.com/en_US/InDesign/6.0/WSFE4C4DDD-967A-4cf0-845F-AB2B86FCC809a.html>

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

am looking for compelling practical reasons why I should want to upgrade…
or not.

Money? Serious recession? More and more work being handled by Aperture (or in your case LR)? I routinely upgrade multiple copies of the Premium Design Suite when a new version comes out, but right now such an expenditure is inappropriate for financial reasons.

Folks saying "Bridge" as a reason obviously work among the suite apps a lot, and that makes sense. However my CS work is not so constant that workflow improvements CS4 over CS3 are likely to pay significant time savings. Even so, I would upgrade if money was not so tight - and getting tighter.

Thank the folks who claimed free markets would self-regulate, money to the top would trickle down...

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

Linda, check out this movie: <http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f1584v1019>

Allen, I hear you on the recession. I justified buying the suite because I need the tax deductions. :)

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

Don't ya know, Cindy, McCain/Obama are going to give us all such tax deductions there will be no taxes? The trillion-dollar+ deficit the Bush Republicans leave for the next administration will magically pay itself off via tax reductions...

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

I could go on and on about these things Allen but I think I don't want to start something here.

[Welles_...@adobeforums.com]

From a visual standpoint one of the most compelling aspects of PS CS4 for me was the leveraging of the CPU to render images with proper anti-aliasing at any resolution. What that means to my work is that I can use my scroll wheel to zoom in and out at will and the image always renders properly no matter where my scroll ends up. 62.73% looks just as smooth as any other percentage. You would only get with 100%, 50%, 25%, 12.5% etc. in earlier versions of Photoshop. Admittedly you need a hefty video card. If you are using a G5, Ann knows all about the ins and outs of the cards needed for those.

[Buko]

if you need to copy between images just pull the tab off and now you have two windows to drag between when your done put the image back

[Welles_...@adobeforums.com]

Thanks Buko, I know that. I'd just like to be able to drop a layer on a tab. I've added that suggestion to the Feature Request area.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

I agree Welles. That would be a very welcome enhancement.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Gee you guys haven't even looked at PS CS4 compelling reasons and you can't think of one, my word.

The clone brush has a preview of the actual region you are cloning. select you source now you have loaded the image of the at source to the size of your brush and as well as the feather move the brush to the location you want to use that source to clone over. Say you are matching a pattern of bricks or fabric texture you see the match, now start cloning just probably save yourself five minutes of trial and error do that ten time and you saved yourself an hour. Knock out ten retouched images in a half hour as opposed to three days.

Is that compelling enough. Dynamically drag the brush to resize it smaller or larger depending on which way you drag you have to hold the option control keys while dragging.

No need to go to the brush panel. You can change its hardness this way as well.

You get a 3D model from a client and they want you to map a design of a label you did to the the 3D model for and animated video for their website. Bring the 3D object into a 3d Layer in Photoshop CS4 place the label art on a normal 2D PS layer above it. Merge down.

Voilá. Mapped!

Put it on the timeline and create your animation of the rotating bottle and export it for you Flash clip or use it as is.

Use the time line to make animations with key frames instead of frame by frame and get much smoother and motion and you can even convert that to frame by frame.

You can import video and place it on the time line as well.

The application frame makes life very much more easy, you can have four or five or more documents open and just select the tab which has the tile of the document visible and it will come to the front you can drag a selection from one tab to another and it brings that document to the front with you selection ready to be drop in place.

Bridge of course you can select a number of images and apply the metadata to all of them at once like copyright notice and how to get in touch with you and restrictions etc. all from the bridge, you can do this in Lightroom but id you are not running light room why go through the trouble.

Preview your AI files in the Bridge, know what colors are used in a file and fonts etc.

The layer adjustments can be access by a panel I never use the menu to access them, I only use the panel.

Ann and Buko and Ramón have convinced Adobe not have Twain included it is optional and you have to add it and with Lightroom it is probably better for those who scan their old film files to scan them to a folder and then open them in Lightroom. I think Light room is a better designed interface then ACR. And offers more options.

And now for the big one the rotate canvas tool. So you don't break you wrist and neck when trying to retouch a part of an image that is upside down. when trying. Just rotate the image hit escape and you are back to normal.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

I did say that I would need to write a book on the subject ….

Actually, I cannot think of a single reason for anyone NOT to upgrade to the CS4 Suite — except or a current shortage of cash.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

No imosition

Bummer on no imposition in ID. I'll continue to use IDCS2 for jobs that need it, so I can still use my Imposition Plug-in.

Cindy, Thank you for explaining Tabs better. This does sound handy. Thanks also for the links. The one link explaining the new features is helpful. Still not sure I feel compelled though. :-)

From a visual standpoint one of the most compelling aspects of PS CS4
for me was the leveraging of the CPU to render images with proper anti-aliasing
at any resolution.

Welles, This is great. Ann mentioned it as well on the phone recently.

The clone brush has a preview of the actual region you are cloning. select
you source now you have loaded the image of the at source to the size
of your brush and as well as the feather move the brush to the location
you want to use that source to clone over. Say you are matching a pattern
of bricks or fabric texture you see the match, now start cloning just
probably save yourself five minutes of trial and error do that ten time
and you saved yourself an hour. Knock out ten retouched images in a half
hour as opposed to three days.

This so far is getting closer to compelling.

Is that compelling enough. Dynamically drag the brush to resize it smaller
or larger depending on which way you drag you have to hold the option
control keys while dragging.

I'm used to using the right and left brackets to enlarge or reduce brush sizes.

No need to go to the brush panel. You can change its hardness this way
as well.

Control-Clicking seems to work well enough in this case.

You get a 3D model from a client and they want you to map a design of
a label you did to the the 3D model for and animated video for their website.
Bring the 3D object into a 3d Layer in Photoshop CS4 place the label art
on a normal 2D PS layer above it. Merge down.

Voilá. Mapped!

So far I don't do much 3D mapping, although this does sound like a nice feature.

Put it on the timeline and create your animation of the rotating bottle
and export it for you Flash clip or use it as is.

Use the time line to make animations with key frames instead of frame
by frame and get much smoother and motion and you can even convert that
to frame by frame.

You can import video and place it on the time line as well.

Cool for those who do video

The application frame makes life very much more easy, you can have four
or five or more documents open and just select the tab which has the tile
of the document visible and it will come to the front you can drag a selection
from one tab to another and it brings that document to the front with
you selection ready to be drop in place.

This must be what Cindy was talking about. It also comes closer to compelling.

Bridge of course you can select a number of images and apply the metadata
to all of them at once like copyright notice and how to get in touch with
you and restrictions etc. all from the bridge, you can do this in Lightroom
but id you are not running light room why go through the trouble.

Preview your AI files in the Bridge, know what colors are used in a file
and fonts etc.

The layer adjustments can be access by a panel I never use the menu to
access them, I only use the panel.

Not sure how this is that different from the way it's been with palettes.

Ann and Buko and Ramón have convinced Adobe not have Twain included it
is optional and you have to add it and with Lightroom it is probably better
for those who scan their old film files to scan them to a folder and then
open them in Lightroom. I think Light room is a better designed interface
then ACR. And offers more options.

I would still need Twain as I have one client that requires I scan business cards, etc. for ads. But you say you can still install it, so that's good.

And now for the big one the rotate canvas tool. So you don't break you
wrist and neck when trying to retouch a part of an image that is upside
down. when trying. Just rotate the image hit escape and you are back to
normal.

Cool

You all are doing a great job on this. It could be compelling enough if I were to use half the new features. I do use Flash, and from time to time I render video in Flash, so if Photoshop would make it possible to customize the frames, that might come in handy.

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

I don't so sales. :)

[L...@adobeforums.com]

I don't so sales.

Me either. Can you tell? :-)

[Buko]

CS3 and 4 have simple imposition with Print booklet.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Yu did not rad about the clone tool and remember you had n use for a camera at one time either and you are already talking about doing video and when it becomes a money making proposition that will be a different thing but learning while yur working is a very anxiety producing experience best to do projects for yourself first to get your feet wet.

The clone tool preview is more then worth the upgrade and saves hours of work.

Also there is a difference between using the brackets and dragging to resize as you as you also see a preview of the brush and the feather as you drag to resize and adjust the hardness. Not so with the brackets.

Also having a panel fir the adjustment layers is much better than you might think and saves a lot of time.

Illustrator has some great features as well like effects,that you can turn on and off at will in the appearance panel in Photoshop unfortunately the effects have to be turned on and off from a dialog.

However you might be right there may not be a compelling reason for you personally to upgrade

[John Joslin]

For my style, the brush resize without all that tapping on [ and ] is great.

... and I can't wait for "The Configurator"!

[L...@adobeforums.com]

u did not rad about the clone tool and remember you had n use for a camera
at one time either and you are already talking about doing video and when
it becomes a money making proposition that will be a different thing but
learning while yur working is a very anxiety producing experience best
to do projects for yourself first to get your feet wet.

Actually I did read about the clone tool, but must have forgotten to include it in my last response. Being able to see the preview as you clone does sound handy. And you are probably right about video as well.

[Super...@adobeforums.com]

@Ann Shelbourne:
No, if ever there was a version to upgrade to, it was CS3, because it was Universal/Intel native. Not having that keeps you locked into PPC on CS2. CS4 does not have such a compelling hardware tie in, at least from a Mac-purchasing perspective.

Also, are you employed by Adobe? Your quote "Actually, I cannot think of a single reason for anyone NOT to upgrade to the CS4 Suite — except or a current shortage of cash." is interesting. Given economic concerns, cash is a very valid reason. But at my office, there is no **very** compelling reason to upgrade, certainly not as much as to CS3. We can continue our core business with CS3 for quite some time. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I think a more realistic, pragmatic answer, would help the OP and everyone.

[Welles_...@adobeforums.com]

Hi SuperMacGuy,

I understand your point and agree that CS3 was very important for those of us with Intel Macs (I purchased a Mac Pro within three weeks or their availability). If you just focus on Mac hardware/software leverage rather than the Photoshop feature set itself, CS4 is pretty darn compelling. I was built to work with Leopard so none of the problems with CS3/Leopard remain, it seems. Then it is built to leverage the GPU to allow for the best display feature set Photoshop has ever offered. To me that was enough of an advance to be considered a necessary upgrade.

Prior to considering those items I was prepared to pass on this upgrade because of the lack of 64 bit support for Mac. After using the new PS somewhat I'm more impressed than I imagined and feel it is one of the best upgrades I've ever gotten from Adobe.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

SuperMacGuy:

Have you had any actual experience of using the CS4 Suite?

I have — and my comments are based on real life experience and not hearsay.

You may think that you are perfectly content to stay with CS3 but my guess is that you will very quickly change your tune once you get your hands on CS4.

Ignorance is bliss — and, in your case, cheaper. But frankly you are missing out ….

[Neil_...@adobeforums.com]

[Note: Ann does not work for Adobe, but she was a beta tester.]

Neil

[Neil_...@adobeforums.com]

[Note to SuperMacGuy: Ann does not work for Adobe, but she was a beta tester.]

Neil

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Neil:

I believe that Beta testers are supposed to neither confirm nor deny that they are or are not Beta testers!

8/

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

SuperMacGuy, Ann has an apparently balanced view of CS4. She does not like everything about it.

<http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?128@@.59b54ded>

:)

[Neil_...@adobeforums.com]

Ann,

It's after the fact, and you've told us you were using the product before its official release. But no need to either confirm or deny you were a beta tester. <g>

Neil

[Buko]

Neil she could be a time traveler.

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

That explains a lot...

:)

[Ci...@adobeforums.com]

That explains a lot...

It explains nothing....

:)

[Neil_...@adobeforums.com]

I realize what I said can be read two ways.

What I meant is that upon its official release, Ann had told us about how she had been working with CS4 for some time and she then provided some good personal feedback for us.

Neil

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

…my comments are based on real life experience and not hearsay.

There is a big difference in being concerned with what might be the outcome of a projected idea (as it was being portrayed by John Nack in his Blog last May) and seeing how the idea translated into reality.

The CS3 Suite had a lot of problems when it was first issued and back in May I was particularly anxious to know that the Photoshop team were going to be fixing the horrible GUI and other shortcomings of CS3 (they have!) before launching into wild schemes which might have lead to unstable performance and pointless bloat (they didn't!).

So there is no contradiction and my comments in this thread are indeed based on real life experience of the shipped version of the CS4 Design Premium Suite and not hearsay.

On another point: I am still waiting for Jim Oblak (alias "Jordan") to post links to actual examples of his creative talent and expertise in the use of Photoshop so that we can all benefit and be inspired by his work.

[I am assuming that such examples actually exist?]

[Neil_...@adobeforums.com]

Ann,

Re: your last paragraph...there's no need to push that agenda. Thanks.

Neil

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

It seemed a perfectly reasonable request Neil as I am sure that his work must be awesome.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

Neil, you have edit rights, right? Why leave her junk there?

I'd like to be inspired by Ann's work too. Many of us are still waiting to feel more than underwhelmed.

It is a miracle that Ann obtained a beta legally from Adobe after comments from her like this... <http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?14@@.59b54ded/1>

How Adobe could have been so stupid and short-sighted as to let this bunch
of immature clowns loose on a program

So no, Ann does not work for Adobe. Ann is an equal opportunity insulter.

She doesn't ask Neil to post examples of his creative talent. Go figure.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

Ann, if you really know who I am then you would realize that posting such samples of my work on this forum would be obscene in some legal jurisdictions.

[J_Ma...@adobeforums.com]

Redact the nipples Jim; show us the porn!

[g_ba...@adobeforums.com]

> if you really know who I am...in some legal jurisdictions.

Poppy, is that you?

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Beta Tester Schmeta Tester who cares the thing is this version is a time saver and extra quality shows in the final results.The tools are great and it offers the user an opportunity of expanding their needs.

if you don't believe it wait for the trial versions. You will be very pleased!

[Lundb...@adobeforums.com]

It's really amusing to see a person who can't stop himself make damaging admissions. So now we know at last

[Ramón_G_Castañeda@adobeforums.com]

…Beta testers are supposed to neither confirm nor deny that they are or
are not Beta testers!

With one exception: when you were publicly and individually encouraged and invited to become a beta tester on a public Adobe forum, as was my case with CS3. In that situation, I would not be revealing anything that was not public knowledge. (After a public spat with John Nack and another luminary on this forum I was promptly kicked off the pre-release program anyway.:D)

As for CS4, I can publicly deny that I was ever a beta tester, since I wasn't and, therefore, was not under any NDA.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Why is this NDA thing always being discussed here? I don't get the point.

I am wondering say a user here on the forum was a beta tester, what would be the purpose of disclosing this information, how would that benefit anyone.

Would it make the person any more Photoshop savvy, I would not think so or am I wrong and being a beta tester does set you aside from other users? I would think not as there must be millions of users that technically advance that simply do not have the time to test software and they maybe far more knowledgeable then people who have the time to test software.

It seems to me that it should have no impact the product.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Buko,

About ID Imposition, I think being able to print to impose is different from actually being able to impose the document itself, then make a press ready PDF with it. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks!

Linda

[Buko]

Print to PDFyou will get an imposed PDF.

but why would you want to? imposition is the printers job.

[Mike_O...@adobeforums.com]

but why would you want to? imposition is the printers job.

So then you consider putting a document together as reader spreads, printer spreads or single pages - the job of the printer?

All the lines are blurred now.

[Mike_O...@adobeforums.com]

Please send all your documents in single page reader spreads. People have no clue as to set up documents for the bevy of conditions that have to be considered for print. Sending printer spreads to a printer is a bad idea. You are not helping them and NOT saving you money.

[Buko]

Sending printer spreads to a printer is a bad idea. You are not helping
them and NOT saving you money.

Well that was my point. I always send the printer single page PDFs in one pdf.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

If the multi-page job is to be printed on a Press, the printers need you to send them digital files in "Readers' Spreads". They will do the final imposition to suit their printing procedures.

[If anyone is still doing Paste-up Mechanicals(?!), they would need to do the impositioning.]

The only time we need to imposition documents, is for inkjet printing and InDesign does offer Print Booklet imposition which will probably cover your needs; or you can use a Script for a more complex job.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Print to PDFyou will get an imposed PDF. but why would you want to? imposition
is the printers job.

Thanks. The printers I deal with (that take PDF) like for me to impose my PDFs before sending them. Maybe I'll try the Print to PDF with Imposition next month using CS3. I seem to remember I tried it when CS3 first came out and then went back to CS2. Can't remember why though.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

They are not very professional printers are they that they would not have imposition software.

And I doubt that many people out side the printing industry know the difference between form wise or sheet wise or the difference between work and turn and work and tumble.

If your printers ask for imposition then they are a group of the laziest SOBs on earth.

And even in the old days we seldom did the paste ups in imposition to easy to make a mistake and the printer many times did not know until they got the paper in stock if it was work and turn or work and tumble because of the grain of the paper and the coverage.

Too expensive to run a $25,000 job to find out you have ghosting in the high ink coverage areas.

Fortunately it is much better now and a lot has been learned of these problems.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

And even in the old days we seldom did the paste ups in imposition to
easy to make a mistake and the printer many times did not know until they
got the paper in stock if it was work and turn or work and tumble because
of the grain of the paper and the coverage. >

I ALWAYS did — because I worked extremely closely with my Printers' senior technicians (and not just their Sales Reps.!); specified the paper stock on which the job would be run; and worked with the imposition format that the printers provided.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Even in the old days they did not want you to do so and one always spec the paper.

I would never do imposition since the printer would probably have not followed it anyway.

I have worked for many printers in their in house art departments for their own designers and have prepared thousands of paste ups over the years and I can actually only recall one I was ever asked to do a job imposition for the press and that was because they had to strip the process of the images first to a prescribed format and they were going to replace the text in Spanish and i think Portuguese as well.

Otherwise it normally did not make sense to do the imposition unless it was a very lazy printer. And I for one would certainly not deal with them.

Sure this was not one of those things that you yourself insisted on?

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Wade:

This is another example of your insufferable arrogance — have you considered that there is the faint possibility that these printers wouldn't have wanted to deal with YOU?!!

That was the way they preferred that the work should be done so that what they recieved was truly "Camera-Ready".

Nothing to do with "laziness" on their part —just highly professional high-end printers doing top quality work including spot colors, pattern varnishes, die-cutting foil-stamping and embossing as required.

We produced numerous pieces using this company and were delighted with their work — as were our clients.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

This is another example of your insufferable arrogance

Talk about arrogance. Sheesh.

Ann, one does not send Reader's Spreads to a printer. How does anyone who actually works in design make a mistake like your previous post?

Learn the business before you start talking down to others.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

We were talking about Camera-Ready Paste-up Mechanicals — something with which you probably never had any experience so your input on this subject is entirely unwarranted and wholly superfluous.

Ann, one does not send Reader's Spreads to a printer.

Readers' Spreads are EXACTLY what one does send to a printer these days — now that we are dealing with DIGITAL files.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

We, as in the folks that actually send files to printers and have already corrected you in this thread, use single page PDF files, not spreads of any kind.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Ann,

Thanks for posting. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has reason to impose, regardless of the above mentioned insults made on the printer. Sigh...

I don't remember a single time when I've sent a spread to print that the printer did not request for me to impose it. This pertains local, out of state, and even a Canadian printer I've done business with. My clients generally hire the printers, so perhaps budget is part of the reason, or perhaps I just assume it's expected of me to impose.

I can't help but think there are many would like this feature to be included in InDesign.

[Scott_W...@adobeforums.com]

Smaller, mom and pop, printers want printer spreads because they aren't really comfortable with PDFs and they have no Preps to help them. And they want YOu to be responsible because they just aren't that confident in their digital prepress skills.

Larger, web press, printers want single reader spreads because they know and want to control the set up for their RIPs.

I do both regularly. I do feel it's best to leave it to the printer. I'm not pleased when I'm asked for printer spreads. It does show a lack or technical skill on the part of a printer. But, depending on budgets, sometimes you have to deal with those that don't like imposing.

I actually keep a copy of IDCS2 installed with the InBooklet plug in installed to allow me to impose IDCS2 files easily without printing to PDFS. I do strongly wish Adobe would add a standard imposition package to ID similar to InBooklet. I don't want to impose and print to a PDF... I want to just impose at times.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

As in #55:

Mike Ornellas (who DOES know what he is talking about!)

Please send all your documents in single page READER SPREADS. People have

no clue as to set up documents for the bevy of conditions that have to
be considered for print.

[Emphasis — mine.]

… because images can cross the gutter.

--------
Just to provide some background info. for those to whom this is unknown territory: Paste-up CAMERA-READY Mechanicals were an entirely different commodity and date from an earlier and different time when there was NO "imposition software".

The Mechanicals, pasted up on artboards, were placed in front of a copy camera and imaged onto printing plate-sized sheets of film into which the image separations would be manually stripped.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

Whether you find a previous comment as an insult to your printer or not, the printer is responsible for imposition. As clearly noted by Wade, the typical designer knows nothing about the type of imposition nor the amount of creep required by the printer.

And even if you are asked to supply impositions, you would never, ever supply a reader's spread to a printer as Ann suggests.

Adobe has added imposition for casual use. It is even present in Adobe Reader. Just ask any Adobe rep why they do not offer more professional imposition functions and they will explain the same thing Wade has noted. Imposition options belong in the hands of the printer, not the designer.

Mike made a mistake in conveying a point he surely knows well. Try my emphasis...

Please send all your documents in SINGLE PAGE reader spreads.

A spread, as any designer knows, is a combination of more than one page. We don't spread a single page. You cannot have a single page combination of more than one page. That's an oxymoron.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Jim:

You are wrong.

InDesign creates Reader Spread PDFs for a purpose — because design elements do cross gutters.

You obviously have very little Print experience.

[Buko]

Back in the days before computers It was common for designers to send us work in Printers spreads as mechanicals. Back then it was easy to chop the film up if they screwed up. Also I laid out many catalogs as 8 flats to save imposing the film.

[Steven_...@adobeforums.com]

I don't know that I've ever worked with two printers who have ever given me the same specs for job submission, but I've worked in prepress long enough that there are two words a designer should never use because they will always get one into trouble: "never" and "always".

These words usually show up in online discussion when people talk about how to use software to give files to printers. Usually they are good advice for a particular situation that might be the most common, but which will prove disastrous in others. My personal favorite is: "Never scan images higher than 250 to 300 ppi." But I digress.

I see a lot of "always" and "never" talk in this thread. It usually comes up when someone asks for a feature. There are always people around who "know better" than to use that feature. Add a touch of defensiveness about the suggestion that their favorite software might be in some way deficient, and you get a flame war.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

Ann, take your insane arguments about readers spreads to an InDesign or QuarkXPress forum. You will quickly be corrected.

[J_Ma...@adobeforums.com]

What are some potential problems with imposing reader spreads?

[Buko]

What are some potential problems with imposing reader spreads?

You don't impose Readers spreads, you impose single pages.

You layout the magazine in readers spreads/facing pages, you export the pdf as single pages in the same PDF. so your PDF has say 32 single pages in it. the printer will take the PDF and impose the 32 pages in a manner that when printed and bound it will be in order.

[Buko]

you layout all work in ID or Quark in readers spreads. This means you layout both pages as a reader would see/read them.

When you set up a document you would choose facing pages.

this is how you would layout a magazine or book. It seems that jim has not laid out a book or magazine and does not know this.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

Sending the document as Readers Spreads provides the printer with the
extra image material that he needs for creep or binding.

So does sending a single page PDF file with proper bleed settings. Apparently Ann is unaware that modern software does this. Even Buko seems to know this.

[Buko]

I just send pages with an 1/8 inch bleed never had a problem.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

You don't impose Readers spreads, you impose single pages.

Which is why Ann is oddly telling everyone (in response to Linda's PDF imposition question) to make Readers Spreads in post #54.

It seems that jim has not laid out a book or magazine and does not know
this.

Buko is apparently a troll. Of course these apps present work as reader's spreads but the PDF file that is sent to the printer (and which Linda was discussing in post #51) would not be sent as readers spreads. If they were, the printer would have to undo the spreads to make their own imposition. This is why Buko and a few other intelligent folks in this thread are advising the single page PDF, not a spread of any kind.

It is clear that some here are either grossly ignorant or simply want to argue.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Mike:

As I thought. Thank you.

[Mike_O...@adobeforums.com]

Shingling should NEVER be done by a customer~! The binding style, page sequence along with the STOCK THICKNESS describes the creep offset.

[Mike_O...@adobeforums.com]

Reader spreads are ok as well for saddle stiched books that are not over 96 pages. For perfect binding, some can deal with the bleed cross over in the bind and burry the hack mistake, but it's better to do single pages for perfect bind.

[J_Ma...@adobeforums.com]

If they were, the printer would have to undo the spreads to make their
own imposition.

I wonder what that entails? I know with manual imposition, it requires only a different imposition template. I'm not even sure I know what "undo" means in this situation. But I'm ready to learn.

[Jim_J...@adobeforums.com]

Single page reader spreads are easier for printers to deal with

Mike, do you understand what an oxymoron is?

A spread is more than one page. You cannot have a 'single page reader spread'. You can have a single page or a reader spread.

[Scott_W...@adobeforums.com]

Okay semantics... single pages and displayed/positioned in reader spread order is what everyone is referring to. I have a feeling you know that Jim and just want to nitpick. Id you truly didn't understand that, then.. well....

[J_Ma...@adobeforums.com]

Well, no. I'm referring to reader spreads. I'd like to know from the big pro himself, reasons why one would NEVER send reader _spreads_ to a printer.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

This is kind of funny! I guess not really worth a response.

[J_Ma...@adobeforums.com]

Funny like a clown?

Seriously, the big pro implied that it would be insane to send a printer reader spreads. I haven't used imposition software in 10 years, but in stripping manually this requires a different template only. Of course, so does supplied printers spreads, but the template would be more complicated (particularly with creep), and you always have the worry that they screwed up the impo anyway. But with reader spreads that isn't a problem.

Is there something I'm missing? I can understand if you said "my $1000 impo program can only center pages," but otherwise it seems to me that while single pages (with appropriate bleed) must be preferred, it wouldn't even be close to _insane_ to send a printer reader spreads. I can't really think of a great reason to demand it of a printer. Maybe the client wants the spread-checked PDF that's signed-off to be the same PDF that goes to the printer? Can't do THAT with single pages...

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

No problems that I know of JM — providing that you have used Printer's marks; indicated fold and trimlines; provided bleeds; and have color management set correctly; have embedded fonts and generally done everything else correctly.

Jim is way out of his depth on this subject.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

If you have elements that cross the gutter and send out single pages you will need to add bleed on the gutter side if the production will be "Perfect Bound".

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Mike:

You are in fact advocating the submission of the original Reader SPREADS — as opposed to separated single pages (cut-out from the original double-page Reader Spread)?