Crineman Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 We want to offer our customers the capability of uploading print-ready PDF's. I have set up templates for one & two sided postcards, one & two page Flyers, and 4 to 16 page Brochures to do this. Everything uploads & looks great on the storefront - the customer sees a gorgeous proof at final trim size. However, I am not able to impose these uploaded PDF's correctly for our Indigo 7500 and I don't know if it's the software or if I don't have something set-up correctly. The problem is that if the PDF's being uploaded are larger than the final trim, the excess image spills over to the page next to it. In the templates, I have the pages set-up as graphic pages, the images to be centered, fill set to none, and no clipping. In the imposition example attached I have it set-up as 8-1/2" x 11" saddle-stitched and 1/8" bleed. I'm attaching the individual PDF's and the imposed file (saddle-stitch imposition) for 2 pages of an 8-page Brochure so you can see the problem. Is this enough information to get some help? If not, please let me know and I'll provide more. Thank you! ***New information on this imposition question*** I took the same PDF that was uploaded to the storefront where it imposed incorrectly and composed it using Fusion Pro using the exact same imposition and it came out correctly - meaning the overlapping didn't occur. What's up with this? Why would the same file proof one way from the storefront and differently through FP? The corrected imposed file is also attached.Sample Pages.zip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreightTrain Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Crineman I was able to recreate and verify the issue you have encountered. Unfortunately, I don't have a simple answer to streamline your problem. There is a workaround to enable you to proceed, which is to get out the 1-up output from MarcomCentral and imposing in FPD. That would give you the same result you used to test the issue. I realize this is not the ideal way to handle it, but at least it allows you to move forward. I have reported and documented the issue, so hopefully we will be able to provide a seamless solution in the near term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crineman Posted March 24, 2011 Author Share Posted March 24, 2011 Richard - Thank you for your quick follow-up to my inquiry. I'm anxious to hear the technical explanation of why the software, using the same imposition file, is giving two different results. Regardless, I'm even more anxious for a seamless solution and would appreciate knowing how to monitor the progress. - Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreightTrain Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Craig, When I get an answer I will let you know. I did notice that the 0-x and 0-y axis was inset from the actual page edge on the pages you provided. My guess is that for some strange reason, the MCC is honoring that shift, which is disrupting the page positioning; where the FPD composition is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.