RE: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark

["Brierley, Sean" <Sean -at- Quodata -dot- Com>]

Hallo:

Actually, a PS printfile does just as well to Docutech, and is a tad
simpler. You have to go via the PS printfile to get to PDF anyway, right? I
used to check my PS printfiles by PDFing them, especially MS Word output. I
love Docutechs for short print runs, even two-color runs. They offer decent
quality at excellent prices, versus offset.

Can the pre-press guys go into a PDF and massage the PostScript? I don't
encourage them to do this, but sometimes, on a unique job, it's a one-time
must-do.

For color seps, I never sent PDF. I am not sure that it'll work. Anyone?
Maybe I should stop by http://www.pdfzone.com to check . . . not that I do
that kind of work anymore.

Best regards,

Sean
sean -at- quodata -dot- com

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	John Fulton [SMTP:John -dot- Fulton -at- enterprisemodeller -dot- com]
> Sent:	Friday, May 12, 2000 9:37 AM
> To:	TECHWR-L
> Subject:	Re: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark
> 
> On Fri, 12 May 2000 14:59:19 +0200, addforlist -at- hotmail -dot- com ("Christopher")
> wrote:
> 
> >
> PDF is wonderful for sending to printers who use Docutech machines - in
> fact, 
> the printers I've dealt with recently have been adamant that PDF is the
> best
> 
> format for them to receive files. PDF files are typically much smaller
> than 
> postscript, so the printers can store them on their server for longer, so
> you 
> can call off short print runs when you need them, thus reducing your
> inventory.
> 
> Now, colour printing is another matter, and something I have no experience
> 
> of, but for high speed, black and white, Docutech printing, PDF is great.