Here is a simple question for you. It's a followup to my first post. Is there a tipping point where you will decide to push your work through OPI or do you use OPI for everything?
We have been using FPOs in InDesign for some time now but have had a bad run of luck with such problems as pictures 'shifting' ie. offsetting, paths not being recognised causing text reflows and confusing Xinet warning messages that led to operators resetting their InDesign preferences.
We had to stop making FPOs from PDFs and reset a few import options but it came to the point where operators lost confidence and started to place only high-res images.
This is unfortunate (for our investment) but I must admit we have had less mistakes and surprises this way.
Very interesting... I have noticed very similar trends in my workplace. I am an operator in a print studio, but I have become a fairly knowledgeable FullPress user over the last 2.5 years since we started using Xinet products. We have gone through several iterations of server and workflow organization, and in my view the little problems like image shifting are most likely to send operators offline to the tried and true methods such as pdf exporting and non-xinet printing. Even though we have been able to solve the problems like image-shifting and visible channels in prints, users tend to lose confidence immediately. I wonder if more options are the answer. Does anyone have experience in providing, for instance, several pdf print spoolers with different purposes for users to compete with the array of options available when users export to pdf from InDesign or Quark? Does this approach attract more operators to make pdfs through Xinet?
We have been using FPOs in InDesign for some time now but have had a bad run of luck with such problems as pictures 'shifting' ie. offsetting, paths not being recognised causing text reflows and confusing Xinet warning messages that led to operators resetting their InDesign preferences.
We had to stop making FPOs from PDFs and reset a few import options but it came to the point where operators lost confidence and started to place only high-res images.
This is unfortunate (for our investment) but I must admit we have had less mistakes and surprises this way.
Very interesting... I have noticed very similar trends in my workplace. I am an operator in a print studio, but I have become a fairly knowledgeable FullPress user over the last 2.5 years since we started using Xinet products. We have gone through several iterations of server and workflow organization, and in my view the little problems like image shifting are most likely to send operators offline to the tried and true methods such as pdf exporting and non-xinet printing. Even though we have been able to solve the problems like image-shifting and visible channels in prints, users tend to lose confidence immediately. I wonder if more options are the answer. Does anyone have experience in providing, for instance, several pdf print spoolers with different purposes for users to compete with the array of options available when users export to pdf from InDesign or Quark? Does this approach attract more operators to make pdfs through Xinet?