[scribus] Will 1.3.5 produce a PDF good enough for printers?

[Stewart]

Hi,

With functions like overprint, and character styles, I'm thinking of using 
1.3.5. What quality PDF's does it produce?
Or should I just soldier on with 1.3.3.12?
Also, 1.3.5 doesn't open a 1.3.3.12 document exactly as it was created in 
1.3.3.12. It seems to use a certain amount of Manual Tracking, changing the 
layout of the text. Not a huge problem but it's there.

Stewart


> Today's Topics:
>
>   1.  Schedule for next major release. (John Culleton)
>   2. Re:  Still the cut-off (John Culleton)
>   3. Re:  Schedule for next major release. (Jeffrey Silverman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 17:55:01 -0500
> From: John Culleton <john at wexfordpress.com>
> Subject: [scribus] Schedule for next major release.
> To: "Scribus User Mailing List" <scribus at lists.scribus.net>
> Message-ID: <200812011755.01626.john at wexfordpress.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="us-ascii"
>
> I am putting together an e-book on using Scribus for book covers. My
> question is, should I base it on 1.3.5 or 1.3.3.12?  1.3.5 has some
> distinct advantages for book cover work.  But the sla files have a
> newer format.
>
> Will 1.3.5 or its successor (4.0?) be released as stable by June 2009?
> If not I will write the e-book based on 1.3.3.12.
>
> I recognize that the only things certain in life are death and taxes,
> but perhaps the developers can drop a hint.  Are we getting close?
> -- 
> John Culleton
> Resources for every author and publisher:
> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf
> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf
> http://www.creativemindspress.com/newbiefaq.htm
> http://www.gropenassoc.com/TopLevelPages/reference%20desk.htm
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 18:05:39 -0500
> From: John Culleton <john at wexfordpress.com>
> Subject: Re: [scribus] Still the cut-off
> To: Scribus User Mailing List <scribus at lists.scribus.net>
> Message-ID: <200812011805.39622.john at wexfordpress.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Saturday 29 November 2008 09:53:02 am Pedrie Roberts wrote:
>> Riku wrote:
>> > I agree. PDF export should be the number 1 target and it should
>> > always be reliable. After all pdf is what most people send to
>> > print shops. I don't need printing from Scribus. What comes to
>> > using the program with this issue, I don't quite see how this
>> > would affect your layout work.
>>
>> The problem is that PDFs are printed as images not as fonts, which
>> means that quality is much poorer than printing straight from
>> Scibus (if only it was possible).
>
> Well the printers I submit work to handle the fonts in pdf just fine.
> My local printer is a Ricoh with PostScript capability so I can
> either save as postscript or else use Ghostscript pdf2ps routine and
> I still  get real fonts.
>
> In general PDFs are not printed as images. From Acrobat Reader for
> example if you print to a file it saves the file as Postscript.
> Convert it back to pdf and the fonts are still there.
>
> -- 
> John Culleton
> Resources for every author and publisher:
> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf
> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf
> http://www.creativemindspress.com/newbiefaq.htm
> http://www.gropenassoc.com/TopLevelPages/reference%20desk.htm
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 18:42:48 -0500
> From: "Jeffrey Silverman" <jeffrey.d.silverman at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [scribus] Schedule for next major release.
> To: "Scribus User Mailing List" <scribus at lists.scribus.net>
> Message-ID:
> <fb0c92310812011542u53be91dcg20c2d82be1114b3d at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> If nothing else, the .sla file format used by 1.3.5 will still likely be
> readable by whatever is the next stable release. So from that POV -- being
> able to open the file in the next Scribus version -- you should be okay.
>
> I have used 1.3.5. and 1.3.3.X and I far prefer to use 1.3.5. BUT it
> definitely has problems, so save your work OFTEN. But it *is* usable.
>
> Let us hear a story on how it turns out. Even if it is a boring story. 
> Throw
> in some references to Angelina Jolie or something to spice it up.
>
> later...
>
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 5:55 PM, John Culleton <john at wexfordpress.com> 
> wrote:
>
>> I am putting together an e-book on using Scribus for book covers. My
>> question is, should I base it on 1.3.5 or 1.3.3.12?  1.3.5 has some
>> distinct advantages for book cover work.  But the sla files have a
>> newer format.
>>
>> Will 1.3.5 or its successor (4.0?) be released as stable by June 2009?
>> If not I will write the e-book based on 1.3.3.12.
>>
>> I recognize that the only things certain in life are death and taxes,
>> but perhaps the developers can drop a hint.  Are we getting close?
>> --
>> John Culleton
>> Resources for every author and publisher:
>> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf
>> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf
>> http://www.creativemindspress.com/newbiefaq.htm
>> http://www.gropenassoc.com/TopLevelPages/reference%20desk.htm
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> scribus mailing list
>> scribus at lists.scribus.net
>> http://lists.scribus.net/mailman/listinfo/scribus
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Jeff Silverman
> jeffrey.d.silverman at gmail.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.scribus.net/pipermail/scribus/attachments/20081201/19508496/attachment.htm>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> scribus mailing list
> scribus at lists.scribus.net
> http://lists.scribus.net/mailman/listinfo/scribus
>
>
> End of scribus Digest, Vol 9, Issue 2
> *************************************