x900mhz

For some of us less seasoned and newbie designers etc, could someone try to explain the difference between the two methods and why?

Thanks.

ronmatt

http://www.photoshopgurus.com/forum/...;topicseen#new

Funny, Mindbender and were just going over this subject :}

retired_paddza

Yeah... we kind of hijacked that thread towards the end... although, it all pertains to the original post in a round about way.

I'm gonna leave the detailed PDF explanations up to ronmatt since he's apparently worked with PDF a lot more than I have and has a more intrinsic understanding of it.

ronmatt

Well then, here goes... Regarding the posted question, which PDF is better for your printer ( assuming you're pertaining to your studio machine and not referring to your printer as the company that does your ink on paper ). It really doesn't matter. You won't have the embedding issues you'd run accross with pdf files you send to RIP output. Your printer deals specifically with your computer. Your printing docs have a few more steps to go through These steps are a bit more rigorous as the pdf will be converted to a postscript file for imposing, ripping for hard proof, ripping to an image setter and/or platesetter. Transparency issues come into play, font embedding, postscript levels etc. Distilling to pdf uses a specific profile ( how the pdf should be written depending on it's intended use ) These profiles are built into Distille.Specialized profiles, supplied from most higher quality print shops can be added to the settings folder, to be used for that printers equipment.
The generic Adobe Library PDF engine, used by all Adobe applications simply writes a generic Adobe PDF. This file may or may not be acceptable for most printshops. So, 'print to pdf vs distilling to pdf completely depends on what you require as a final doc.
I hope this helps you udnerstand the difference as well as why there is a difference.