Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Can the halftone box be added to cs6 ?

Apr 23, 2012 2:44 PM

I have asked if this feature was avail in cs6 and the answer was no. They said not many printer needed it ? I am a screen printer and us photoshop regularly and that feature is a ver important part of my serparations when I make my film. I am also sue that thousands of screen printer also use this feature. Why can not such a simple already installed feature not be kept? Maybe off set printer do not need this but screen printers need this feature, we must be able to adjust our DPI , dot style and angle. Can someone please look into this . I am running cs3 the last version to do this .

 

Thanks

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2012 5:11 PM   in reply to Robin j. Chambers

    No: we said that not many printers *supported* it.

    Only PostScript level 1 devices supported that option -- Level 2 and 3 RIPs overrode the option.

     

    99% of the people trying to use the feature, weren't getting any effect from it because their printer RIP ignored it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,060 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2012 8:02 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Chris, the question is then, given the need of a whole market, is there a way to create something similar for them?

     

    There is no equivalent/similar option in PS L2 or 3 RIPs, or can it only be set in the RIP/driver itself?

     

    What is the best solution for their problem?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2012 10:02 AM   in reply to Pierre Courtejoie

    That particular feature could only work in PostScript, and only worked correctly on Level1 RIPs (and didn't even work correctly on most of the Level1 clone RIPs).

     

    I just do the halftoning on the document (at printer res) and send a bitmap to the printer.

    I'll have to talk to DaveP and see if we can come up with something to simplify the workflow.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,060 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2012 2:42 PM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Thanks, Chris! I think many screen printers would be happy to know you are looking into the issue.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2012 3:35 PM   in reply to Robin j. Chambers

    >> Yes, Photoshop is moving away from print services (intentionally).

     

    That is not the case.  We're just having to deal with a lot of bad drivers and OS problems lately -- which sometimes forces us to simplify the print path in order to get things working for most of our users.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2012 9:04 PM   in reply to Robin j. Chambers

    >>  even though 1000's of printer have requested it.

     

    We actually have less than 20 requests.

    I don't know where they made their requests, but it wasn't to us.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,060 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 25, 2012 1:17 AM   in reply to Robin j. Chambers

    Ask all your peers, or invite other screenprinters in specialized forums/blogs/sites/tradeshows to vote for this request, and explain why it is needed in your workflow. Do post the hints that some rips allow an override of the function, the more information, the better (Been printing at school, and had the opposite problem, so screen changes because of PostScript2 on the printer, but did need the option!) :  http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/screen_function_ for_separation_output

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 28, 2012 10:46 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    I will admit I am surprised by the arrogance of Adobe on this one. It is probably not really arrogance but just being out of touch with a specific market segment. Even though "1000s" of users have not complained, it has been loud and clear on the other forum with this topic and as we all know, the world does not always revolve around forums and a LOT of people simply don't know where to go.  And, there are thousands of my customers around the world who - guess what - don't speak good English and would never post on a forum. The removing of the screen button is causing most printers/customers I know to stay with CS4 or earlier.  I even posted about this on my popular website www.T-BizNetwork.com.  Yes, I promoted the roll out of Creative Cloud wich I love but I also commented on the lack of screen button.

     

    I make a RIP for screen printers called T-RIP. It use to be called FastRIP.  I have at least 9,000 users of my rip and we have never had a problem.  You can turn on or off whether you  want the application to dictate the lpi, angle, and dot shape. I have at least 10,000 users of my FastFilms and T-Seps software for color separating. My guess is between me and my competitors there are at least 30,000 T-Shirt printers using industry specific automated separation programs for Photoshop and they all print "Channel Separations" right out of Photoshop. For Adobe to say they can "simply convert the file to a bitmap" is again an ignorance of how we do it.  I also do color separations for a living and most of the files I get are Photoshop Layers files because they are usually high-end photos of Nascar drivers, country or rock stars, etc., and the final separations are typically ten colors. That's ten channels to split, upsample, convert to halftones and print.  Where is the work flow advantage there?  You have just added about 15 minutes to my time.  If I split ten channels I better know which channel is which so I can now re-name each file.

     

    And, doing it that way means I have lost any channel header information and the world of screeners use that to place the print order, mesh count, and Pantone color right on the films as a "label."  Now the screen makers and press people know the setup because the detail is on the film. Simple. Saves time. No, we do not want to take this file as a DCS2 to Illustrator. Why would we? One more step. And, a LOT of screeners use Corel. I know. Don't go there.  But, it is true. 

     

    I still use CS4 because I can simply put the "eye" on a channel and print and the channel header information prints on the films.  Talk about saving a LOT of steps for the workflow - this is a must.

     

    There are a handful of high profile people in the little and ignored T-Shirt printing world and I am one of them yet I have never had a call or questions from Adobe. With all the active T-Shirt Forums and this topic posted, I am curious why Adobe will not take time to be kind to this little and obviously unimportant market. It would not have taken much for Adobe to talk to the actual RIP makers in this industry like me, Accurip, MultiRIP and a few others. You comment on the problem with RIPs but I think I have sold the most RIPs in this industry and I have never had Adobe talk to me.

     

    Sorry for the long ramble and attitude. You can see it is a sore spot to T-Shirt printers who feel Adobe has turned their backs on them. All we really want is for you get dirty and talk to people in the trenches who make RIPs and to put away your argument that it doesn't work and put the screen button back in.  We then will all upgrade to CS6, life will be good and our workflow will be back to normal.  Nirvana!

     

    Scott Fresener

    T-Biz Network

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,060 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 14, 2013 6:09 AM   in reply to Robin j. Chambers

    To float up the discussion with a link about a separation method, that one could automate: http://vimeo.com/2811225#at=0

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points