No, that's wrong. PDF is a proper delivery format, there are special PDF
variants specifically designed for press and they provide all the needs
for printing a file properly.

Unless their system parses ai files to make stuff, or you want to include special instructions for gold deboss, etc.

Then the ai file is more useful because it allows separation of the layers in a single file.

One of our printers in China requires this. Saying they should do it another way is your own opinion.

Minor mistakes can be fixed in the pre-flight software. If a preflight
software is not enough, then the file should go back to its source in
order to be fixed.

PDF loses information from the original. In our case information that's important to the methods of our printer(s).

Print shops don't have to fix files. That's an ill workflow and no
serious print shop does that.

Ours gets fantastic results and for a really decent price. So again, all your own opinion.

Supporting AI or CDR is not mandatory for sending files to press.

Depends on who you are printing with. I've had people insist on FOGRA39 pdf, and they would accept nothing else.

It may not be resonable, but it's the way it is.

Although the free software stack could use some love to make the export
of press-ready PDFs more straight forward, it is absolutelly possible to
create industry-grade PDF files with free tools.

Definitely, but that's not the point. The point is getting the printer what it needs (or thinks they need) to print. It's not my job to educate people who know their own systems better than I do. My Chinese is also not that good, and I'd have to fly out to Shenzhen just to introduce them to the wonders of Inkscape, Scribus, and GIMP.

Most of my graphic design work goes to offset print shops, and I haven't
had any problems during the last 6 or 7 years after I polished my
pre-press workflow.

We've clearly had different experiences.

If you have the luxury of only working with a few local printers, great.

Pretending like every printing company needs the same thing... not so great.

> On a personal level, I do push open formats. When we need an article
> printed, or website automated, we gotta give them what they need, not
> what we want them to use.
>
> Also, what happens when there's only a handful of people working on
> the standards, and it takes them years (and years) to come to the full
> spec?

That gets harder when people use their efforts to support proprietary
formats instead.

It takes a lot more effort NOT to. I know that, and if you've "polished" your workflow you also know that.

I am willing to make the extra time sacrifice. I do not expect everyone else to.

A good enough implementation of proprietary formats could make the need
of a proper open alternative less urgent.

And it doesn't matter at all if the implementation isn't interchangeable with the software everyone else uses.

It's a good alternative only if everyone is on-board with it. People are going to choose the software that supports what most people use for work.

Supporting proprietary technologies does harm open formats. See ODF vs.
DOCX and the rest of the MS XML office formats.
Supporting proprietary technologies we're always a step behind. It's
their format, and we have to catch up.

Boss: Hey, can you send me that new letterhead as a docx file?

Me: No! You should use Libre Office, because it's free (as in freedom), and proprietary software is bad for you, and abuses your freedoms!

Boss: Uh, yea... just send the file over in .docx, please.

Gonna continue to tell him "no?"

> I was a bit curious to see what you thought of my feature list, since
> you are apparently also a graphic designer.
> If you've lost interest, that's cool too.

Not at all. I disagree with you regarding several points, but we share
the same interest of making free software better.

Awesome. I think maybe we will get farther towards common goals discussing these points.

3. Would be nice. afaik is not possible at the moment because of Cairo.
The workaround is taking the file to Scribus (the method I use). That
works fine but the workflow could be improved a lot.

That's also the method I use. I usually wind up flattening most of the vector stuff into png and shoving it into the background, importing text separately in many cases seems to work better. It works, but as you noted, it's a bit tedious.

5. AFAIK It's on the radar. That would be very useful.

6. Import is possible since AI files are PDFs with some extra juice. The
import is not perfect but there are some methods to get the appearance
right. The imported stuff becomes RGB though.
Not a show-stopper because you can use a late or intermediate binding
workflow though.
As I mentioned earlier, exporting shouldn't be a concern. Proper PDF
support is what we need for press, not AI.

Unfortunately, the latest release broke it. Illustrator CS3 errors with "Can not open Image".

I've filed a bug report, but I do wonder if there's anything that can be done given Illustrators lack of detail about what has gone wrong.

7. That would be really useful indeed.

That would almost entirely negate the need for an ai file, since as you noted, they are essentially the same format.

Well, negate it as long as Illustrator will open it on the other end, of course

8. If you look Illustrator closely, you'll find that all the non-vector
features get rasterized by its "flattener". We don't have a tool for
that, and the rasterization in the PDF exporter is flaky. You can still
use manual workarounds (like moving the filtered objects to a layer and
create a bitmap copy separated from the pure vector objects).

Yep, that's the method I use currently. I've found it's asking for trouble to send out files with raster transparency (alpha) though.

I generally will flatten shadows into the background and let vector text hover over it to prevent horribleness around the edge of the transparent area.

It's not automatic but it gives you a great deal of control with little
effort. That's what I do and the results I get are excellent and nobody
in the print industry complains :-)

If you can choose your own printers, sure. Owning a design company has those perks. I've got to work with popular magazines who I can't up and say "well, we just aren't going to advertise with you then", and packaging companies chosen by our supplier factories, whom we are stuck with.

Think I'll come to work for you though. Sounds like heaven. lol

> I'm also a professionl graphic designer with more than 15
> years of
> experience and half of that using free software exclusively,
> we can
> share our views there.
>
>
> It surprises me that you wouldn't understand the difficulties of using
> Inkscape in an industry dominated by Adobe products. Maybe you don't
> have to work for a company, or with other artists? Are you freelance
> only? How much of the 15 years is industry experience?

I own a small design firm. We use free software, and we hire freelancers
who use free software too.
We are commited to free software so we don't do things that requires the
use of non-free software (like designer flash ads, for instance)

See, now that's making more sense. I don't have the luxury to say "no"... to anyone. Unfortunately most graphic designers are in my position.

Freelancing is nicer in that respect, because I can, (and do) choose open formats for everything. It makes it easier to give the customer files they can edit and use free of charge.

But for the rest of our work, which is traditional graphic design,
branding, printed stuff, large format prints, motion graphics and web,
free software is enough.

Oh definitely. Photoshop has been collecting dust for a long time now on my work machine, and is non-existent on my home machines (Ubuntu Linux). Illustrator is only fired up when a printer complains.

Scribus is not even close to being as easy to use as InDesign, but it's usable, and I'm not generally doing a lot of layout these days anyway, fortunately.

Not perfect, sure. But we get the job done, and none of our clients see
any difference.

True. That's how my freelance work goes. And I use local printers who are willing to work with what I have to do that. Lots of happy clients.

We have some protocols to avoid the problems with proprietary formats,
and they work most of the times. It's not that hard really.

You should share them. Have you thought about publishing your workflow for the benefit of other design companies?

I'd consider my workflow pretty good, but I learn new stuff all the time.

> Just a heads-up: working with Illustrator files is going to be high on
> most designer's priority list. Esp those who have worked in the field
> for any length of time. It's all you get from other people, customers,
> etc.

Not here. We use PDF as delivery format.
It's good for press-ready files, and it's also good for logos, identity
manuals, etc.
Our clients hire us for final work, not for editable files, so we
deliver files in a format they can view and print without any problems.
If they need editable files we have files in open formats that don't
require any expensive software to be opened and edited.
Most of our clients see this as a benefit. It's how you sell it :-)

Yes, that's how my freelance projects go... but you had mentioned wanting industry artists to be spokespeople for Inkscape. I'm letting you know these people will want compatibility as a high-priority, because it's the reality of the industry at this point in time.

It's gotten much better though, esp since Scribus came along to help with printed document export.

> I did get one .xcf file for engraving once though. Even though it was
> the wrong format for engraving, seeing a GIMP file used in the wild it
> made my whole week! :D

Many free software advocates with no experience in print usually suggest
that people should send SVGs to print shops.
That's absolutely wrong. SVGs are not suitable for print, as XCF isn't
an adequate format for print.
The standard for press is currently PDF and TIFF. We can make them with
free software.

It was a logo, and I converted it to vector easily using Inkscape.

I was just happy to see people using Free Software.

It matters not-at-all to me if they used it correctly.

I am good enough to compensate, and it's part of my job to make things easy for the customer using my expertise.

Thanks for your thoughts. And share your workflows ffs! ;)

Got a company website by chance? I may be able to direct my freelance overflow in your direction.

-C