Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 Hi, Just finishing my work and I'm doing some export tests. The PDF obtained is giving me many issues with the quality. I attach you some examples of the document and the results to know if that is an issue or I'm doing something wrong. Thanks Example.pdf Zoomed area.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Sean P Posted August 31, 2017 Staff Share Posted August 31, 2017 Hi Herojas93 The PDF will rasterise any unsupported features which is generally caused by the use of LayerFX. Without having the document I can't say for sure why one object is being completely rasterised and the other is just the shadow. Feel free to attach the AFDesign document and I can take a look! You could try changing the 'Rasterise' option to 'Nothing' and see what soft of results that gives you. Alternatively you could remove your Drop Shadows from the objects that are getting rasterised and creating a dummy layer below the main object with the shadow applied. That might help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 Here I attach you the source document. Any advice you can give me will be grateful. I have to export a manual with 120 pages and I would like to have the best result. Thanks Source_DOC.afdesign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 That is the result with the option "Rasterize NOTHING". Is not good for me because I'm loosing shadows and effects. Rasterize_NOTHING.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Sean P Posted August 31, 2017 Staff Share Posted August 31, 2017 Because of the you have used a lot of Filter Effects which are not supported by PDF, it's going to be very tricky and time consuming to ensure all objects are retianed as vector. However by changing a few export settings you should get a much better export: Rasterise: Unsupported Properties Downsample Images: Unchecked Use DPI: 800 - This will effectively double the image resolution of all rasterised objects. Allow JPEG Compression: Unchecked Other things you could try is to export each piece of hardware as a separate image (with a large image dimension to retain detail) and then place those (using File > Place) in the original document. I think that might give an acceptable result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 I understand your explanation and your solution improves the PDF, but I'm still not understanding why I'm having different results in the same document with same Assets. The unique difference between the panels showed at this file are the gradient back squares. The pushbuttons and effects are both the same. See the ghost effect between panels without care about the resolution of the document. See also that the raster effect is different even though been the same object. Detail_800.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_B_C Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 To get rid of these “ghost” objects, set the blend mode of the group called Parte Teclado to Normal. Export.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_B_C Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 And yes, I would also suggest that you make yourself your life a little easier by following the idea of Sean. Why not isolate each piece of hardware by exporting it to a high-resolution image file (these parts of your schematic will be rasterised anyhow) and place it in the final document? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Sean P Posted August 31, 2017 Staff Share Posted August 31, 2017 Looking further into that asset I can see they are not exactly the same. See my attached AFDesign file. In your originals you have the right hand panel Grouped, where as the left hand panel has not been. The Filter Effects have then been placed on that group, which means anything inside that group is getting rasterised (which is why it looks worse). Whereas on the left hand panel there is no additional group and the filter effects have been placed on rectangle which means the objects inside are not being incorrectly rasterised. Now I do admit that those circles should not be appearing where the object is not visible, so I'll get those reported to development. Modified.afdesign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 48 minutes ago, A_B_C said: To get rid of these “ghost” objects, set the blend mode of the group called Parte Teclado to Normal. Thanks for your advice. I'll do it. 31 minutes ago, Sean P said: In your originals you have the right hand panel Grouped, where as the left hand panel has not been. The Filter Effects have then been placed on that group, which means anything inside that group is getting rasterised (which is why it looks worse). Whereas on the left hand panel there is no additional group and the filter effects have been placed on rectangle which means the objects inside are not being incorrectly rasterised. I did that because the panel is composed by 3 pieces and I want to have same shadow effect at 3 as a only one. The solution could be give shadow effect to the 3 objects separately and then group them? 31 minutes ago, Sean P said: Now I do admit that those circles should not be appearing where the object is not visible, so I'll get those reported to development. Before export the full document I'll wait for the comment of the Dev team about that. Thanks so much guys for you help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Sean P Posted August 31, 2017 Staff Share Posted August 31, 2017 Just now, Herojas93 said: I did that because the panel is composed by 3 pieces and I want to have same shadow effect at 3 as a only one. The solution could be give shadow effect to the 3 objects separately and then group them? Is that the top and bottom bars (I believe I removed them to isolate the problem)? If so you don't actually have to group them, just make them as child layers to the larger parent panel (which you'll have to make larger). They'll get clipped by this and I believe it should export without the problem. See attached Modified2.afdesign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 Ok, I see. Still one doubt, see the attached picture and source. I have removed all the FX effects and I only leave lines and shapes. Focus on part called display. What is the part " not supported" by the system in order to create the PDF? Gradients? Why is still rastering a part of the panel? Sorry about that but I need to understand perfectly the rules before change anything. I have a document with about 120 pages to export and publish. Source_panel.afdesign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Sean P Posted August 31, 2017 Staff Share Posted August 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, Herojas93 said: Ok, I see. Still one doubt, see the attached picture and source. I have removed all the FX effects and leave only lines and vector. Focus on part called display. What is the part "supported" by the system in order to create the PDF? Gradients? Why is still rastering a part of the panel? Sorry about that but I need to understand perfectly the rules before change anything. I have a document with about 120 pages to export and publish. Source_panel.afdesign Ticking 'Allow advanced features' should allow the right hand side (and the number text) to export correctly. Note many of the number pad keys have FX on them still. Looking at your number objects they can be massively simplified and reduce the amount of objects used. Simply by adding a stroke, and parenting shapes with other shapes. In fact you could use Transparency Gradients to fake a Gaussian Blur which will make them export at 100% Vector. See attached. Button.pdf Button.afdesign A_B_C 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 Ok I have been doing some tests and I found that the problem with my designs is not the complexity of the objects. One of the things is that apply a FX to a layer (GROUP) considers everything inside as "not supported". (EXAMPLE 2) Another thing is that the system is doing funny things with the supported and not supported objects. Have a look to your example and see how the result now is different as yours without changing any setting. Just exporting it again. I believe in that case the system is considering that opacity is a non supported effect. (BUTTON) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff Sean P Posted August 31, 2017 Staff Share Posted August 31, 2017 Did you tick 'Enable Advanced Features'? This should definitely help you get better results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herojas93 Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share Posted August 31, 2017 No I didn't. Now is enabled for all those tests. Now I have try and with your object the result is fine, no with mine. Does it have any bad effect for the system if I leave 'Enable Advanced Features' always enabled? Did you have a look into the FX applied to a group or layer? All IN is considered as "NOT SUPPORTED" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts