Export to PDF instead.
It works well, that way Now I see that InDesign uses Distiller settings to export PDF files directly.
It works BETTER that way.
I had this exact problem on Friday. I was on a deadline, it was last thing and it was giving me no end of grief because I kept checking and double checking that my settings were correct. I emailed the printer's prepress guy (who had gone home) and asked him to hold the job until tomorrow (Monday) when I could phone him and try to sort it out. If he doesn't have any better ideas I will export to pdf.
But exporting to pdf is not a desirable solution. I need to use Distiller. There can be a huge difference in file size. I don't want to spend all morning tomorrow uploading my files to an ftp server when they really should have them by now.
I'm not expecting you to be able to help me with this one because of the time difference (I'm in Australia) but I have another deadline midday Thursday with a larger publication. Any solutions by then will be greatfully received.
This is a major problem with CS6 that Adobe needs to fix asap.
If you have to distill, then I would try addingthe bleed on all 4 sides. Most imposition software that I know of should be able to handle removing the inside bleed while leaving the rest.
You could also crop off the inside bleed with AcrobatPro Document>Crop Pages...
No need to manipulate the PDF, bleed all around ought to be *completely* safe. It's a pretty basic function of imposition software to correctly handle inside bleed.
Thanks for your input, guys.
I saved the file as an idml and opened it in CS5. Postscript files through Distiller made pdfs the way they are supposed to be.
So it worked out. I was lucky because the file was completely compatible with CS5.
But I don't want to make this my normal workflow. For example, the job I need to send on Thursday has redefined text frame object styles to make use of CS6's awesome new text functions. Continually opening files created in CS6 in CS5 is an invitation for headaches.
Which leaves me with Peter's (and Jongware's) suggestion.
I like to have control and this puts my baby in the hands of someone who may not share my enthusiasm for a job done right. At the moment it looks like the best option. I'll just have to make sure the printer understands what he needs to do.
At the end of the day, the idml method and the inside bleed method are both work arounds.
I should be able to put 0 as inside bleed and have my pdfs come out right. Seriously, check out RosenBosen's screen grabs at the top of the post. It's not acceptible and Adobe needs to fix it.
Oh, I certainly agree it's a bug. Make sure to report it to Adobe.
If I have the time, I'll check if this also is in CS4. I *think* it's not, but in general I have bleeds all around and rely on the printer's imposition software to get it right.
Continually opening files created in CS6 in CS5 is an invitation for headaches.
Taking the bleed off in Acrobat would be easier.
Yeah. This is probably the best work around.
I just made an Acrobat X action wizard and although it's an unnecessary step it's a painless one.
Thanks for the suggestion.
I have reported it.
No need to relicate it in CS4. The problem is CS6 Dstiller as far I can make out.
From the printing house don't accept the pdfs exported that way. They want them distilled with exact profile. We produce hundred of pages per month. Correcting the bleeds with acrobat takes too much time, wich we don't have.
Please tell me when to expect Adobe to fix the problem? What we have to do to make them fix it as soon as possible? The problem is bigger than I thought.
We can't tell when, or even if, this problem will ever be fixed. Distilled PDF is an archaic workflow that is not really supported any longer. If your printer cannot accept an exported PDF made to PDF-X standards you need to either live with doing a lot of extra work, or find a printer who isn't stuck in the 1990s.
You are so kind and helpful!
I wasn't trying to be kind. I was telling you the unpleasant truth.
I understand that in some parts of the world you don't have a lot of choices as far as printers, and that technology is slower to catch up in those places, but that doesn't change reality. From a business standpoint (and I am not employed by Adobe), it makes no sense for Adobe to throw money at fixing a problem that is only present in antiquated workflows, especially if there are workarounds. If you are stuck in one of those places, you have my sympathy, but there's nothing anyone here can do to help you. I would not, however, assume that just becasue a printer tells you that the PDF needs to be distilled that it is true. I would certainly suggest trying an exported PDF made to the same specs and see if it RIPs.
If you are not stuck in a technology backwater, thre is no excuse for this workflow other than your choice to support this printer out of some sort of loyalty. I can respect that, but that deciscion comes with some costs.