Conflicts with Lulu

If I may guess on this one, it isn't a "problem" with Pages or MacOS X, but a problem with Lulu, which may not implement all allowed ways of storing embedded fonts.

There have been problem reports in the past with embedded fonts, but I don't think they turned out to be "real" problems with Pages, but more likely bad fonts or fonts which aren't delivered with a licence to be embedded.

If you run into that kind of fonts, there is likely to be a "problem" with Pages 2 as well.

(Please, contradict me on this, anyone who has a different experience.)

Actually Magnus, it is a problem with Pages. Lulu uses industry standard compliant interpreter software. The only people who have problems with their service are people who create .pdfs from a Mac OS X platform.

The problem is that Apple decided that any .pdfs must be created with subsetted fonts. Generally this is helpful as it reduces file-size. The problem here is that Pages (and any Mac OS X generated .pdf) produces multiple subsetted fonts. That means that in a document with Helvetica, it subsets over and over and over rahter than just embedding the Helvetica font 1 time. Lulu (and any other automated parser) is unable to interpret this.

So far I've not been able to find a setting or a tool or another programn to correct this. I've used the work around posted at Lulu and it doesn't work. I've tried every angle I can think of with Adobe Acrobat Pro 7.0. I've downloaded a couple thrid-party fixer apps. Lots of options about how to apply subsetting after the .pdf creation, but not a single comment on how to unapply the subsetting.

My book ended up with 87 different subsetted versions of the primary font, and nothing I can do seems to change this.

I love Pages, but if I can't export my print-ready document in a way that is compliant with professional printing houses that only take digital input, then I'm hosed.

If someone out there has a suggestion or a solution, I'd love to hear it. But so far (several hours on Google) I've found nothing.

I take it then, that the problem is the same in Word 2004, the latest version of Nisus and Mellel. So the problem is not your love of Pages, it is that OS X is your problem, is that correct? So really if you cannot find a workaround, you would have to move to a PC is that correct? What about writing in Pages and then do a final export to Word or .rft format and then give it to a friend on a PC to have OpenOffice do the .pdf bit? Does the X11 version of OO have the same issue when creating .pdfs on OS X?

The problem lies in OS X, I think that's correct. Something about Apple's implementation of .pdf rendering. As for the suggestion you offer...

Certainly I can export the text to some other format (word, rtf, even plaintext). That's not the problem. The problem is that the booklet has been completely laid out in pages and exporting into another software (or to a PC, heck no...) would require laying out the text, images and page formatting again from scratch. While it's a colossal pain, I can do that...

It's just too bad that the Apple product I want to use isn't capable of doing something that should be simple. All I want to do is have it create a PDF either with NO embedded fonts at all (I'll use standard ones) or with NO embedded subsetting.

I know that Pages isn't InDesign. But that's why I like it. My office team has become much more productive using iWorks than the other software we were using (mostly Microsoft Office stuff). It's much more intuitive and quick to get the job done--at least for us.

But this problem is stumping me.

Is the workaround on Lulu the same as the one in the link in the first post in this thread?

Yup. It consists of outputting from Pages into a Postscript file, then opening the PS file with Preview, which converts it into a PDF. Then you "Save as" into a new PDF.

From the forum over at Lulu it seems like this work-around worked for a few people at first, but I've not seen any recent posts that say they've gotten it to work. Nearly all the posts say "Didn't work for me..."

I still claim that Apple is doing the right thing, even though it may not be what you want it to do. The PDF specification allows multiple subset embedded fonts. I think that is clear from the fact that Adobe Reader happily opens MacOS X generated PDFs. And Acrobat Professional saves them and keeps the multiple subsets without complaints.

It may not be common for other software to support this feature, but nevertheless the feature is allowed.

But, even if I am right with the above, it of course doesn't help you. The workaround printing to PS probably works depending on which printer driver you have. I have no printer at all, and therefore cannot test it. If you are able to select different kinds of printer drivers, you may be able to find one, where the printing solution works.

If that doesn't work for you, you may want to have a look at ghostscript. This is a suggestion - not a recommendation of something I would be an expert on. ghostscript can generate PDF (and PS?), but last time I had a look at it several years ago, it was not easy to configure. It is free in terms of money but expensive in terms of time.

Magnus, I appreciate your support of Apple. I'm a raving fan myself. But this isn't my problem. Consult the web. There isn't a single professional commercial ripping software (the software that printers use to parse PDFs and prepare them for their printers) that can parse these PDFs. Not one. And this problem began with the introduction of OS X. The only reason that you may not have heard about this is that most high end graphic designers on Apple platforms use Adobe products, like Pagemaker or InDesign now. And--of course--Adobe products can create PDFs that can be read. So those people don't ever encounter this problem. Because of course Adobe PDFs are compliant with Adobe's standards. (Unfortunately you can't even use the "print to" option to use the Acrobat Distiller from the Pages print dialogue. Somehow Pages overrides the settings and forces the distiller to create multiple redundant subsets.)

Where the problem got magnified is with the advent of Pages. Here's why. People see Pages as a layout and design software "for the rest of us." And rightly so. This, I believe, is Apple's intent. So a lot of people have started using it in the past two years.

Some of those people switched from Microsoft Publisher--which, while not a professional layout program--is a ton easier to navigate than InDesign. Some of these people expect to be able to print with a commercial service. So when they go to try, they use the native OS X PDF creation tool, and then discover to their horror that not all PDFs are created equal.

Now professionals know this, but your average user does not. They're just told that PDFs are a universal format. Everyone can open it and read it. They send of the doc to be printed and it won't work. I tell ya, Magnus, this problem is out there on the web a thousand times and thousand times.

Subsetting is a useful tool. It reduced PDF file sizes. That was critical when we were all using dial-up connections. It's still helpful today on large documents. But all I'm asking for, all these people need, is a switch somewhere that allows it to be turned off. That's all. Nothing more. Just a switch that allows it to be turned off. You need three basic options: (1) Embed the entire font whole, should the permission bit allow it. (2) Subset the fonts to save space. or (3) Neither embed nor subset, forcing the document to use a Multiple Master font (Arial, Times NR, etc.)

I've decided that I will have to re-layout my booklets in InDesign. I know the file will be accepted just fine. That solution works for me, but it isn't a good one. Adobe CS2 costs nearly $700.00. I own it, but most desk-top publishers do not. The people that Apple is targetting with iWork generally do not. I can invest the several hours necessary for this task. But it's too bad that I have to.

After a lot of research I learned that Apple switched to forced subsetting after they had a problem in their PDF generator with embedded graphics. Somehow this change fixed that problem. But it created--in my opinion--an even larger one. If you can't get your PDF to print with a commercial printer, what's the point?

While I've already started on my InDesign revision, I'd still like to see or hear a solution to the problem. There are a lot of people who love Pages (and I hope it will continue to grow and evolve to the point where I never have to use a Microsoft product again...) and want to use it for all their layout needs. Right now this is a roadblock that will keep this from happening.

Yes, I understood the problem. My point is that Apple isn't obliged to implement all the necessary features for professional printers in their Print To-implementation of PDF. They could do it. They make people disappointed, sad and frustrated by not doing it. But they deliver what they claim to deliver - specification compliant PDFs.

For your option number 3 above, you know you can remove some embedding with Acrobate Professional, right? Go to Advanced > PDF Optimizer and "Unembed". I don't know if that gives the wanted result though.

Looking at http://parex.metro.st/ftp/20060404_Boston.pdf I see Helvetica embedded as subset twice and in full once(!). The PDF producer is Adobe Acrobat 6.0.

If you look at http://parex.metro.st/ftp/20060405_Nice.pdf you can remove "Agenda-SemiBold" about 20 times ⚠ in the PDF Optimizer, but it appears only once in the Document Properties. The PDF producer is PDFlib Personalization Server 6.0.3 (PHP5/Win32).

It seems Apple isn't alone with peculiar embeddings.

(I actually don't see myself as an Apple fan. To me MacOS X simply happens to be the least frustrating of the available operating systems.)

I know this was a problem that got mentioned several times for Pages 1.

However, the solution for problematic PDFs that were produced by Pages and not properly readable to Adobe Reader was to print them as PDF-Xs.

If you do a search in the Apple forums you should be able to find some info about it.


Peter

Yup. I'm aware of those. I read everything I could get my eyes on both here, at Adobe's support pages and at Lulu, the On-Demand printer I'm hoping to use. I've tried the PDF-X process but it still ends up with the same thing--multiple and redundant subsetted fonts. I do get less! But still too many. My document went from having 86 iterations of Helvetica to 35. But 2 subsetted versions of the same font is too many and it confuses the ripping software that translates the PDF for the commercial printer.

Schelske, I agree with you. I Would like to have a fully embedded or no embedding feature for apple PDF creation. Lulu is a really great company to work with and the service they offer is one of a kind as far as I know. It would be a good idea if apple approached them and tried to resolve this unfortunate impass.

I agree that Apple doesn't HAVE to because they are following a standard, and kudos to them for it, but when has Apple ever stood for a simply "okay" user experiance? Just the fact that Adobe allows a font to be fully embedded and to remove embedding, tells you that someone thought it was important.

I really don't understand why Lulu's printers can't handle the multiple embedding, if acrobat can, but it seems a bit deeper than just the PDF. Lulu tells me that the Post Script output of Pages is also not acceptable (Does PS also include font embedding?). I don't think that anyone is crying foul on Apple, it's just that there is a feature that is needed that seems to not be correctable with software that is available. I think if Acrobat was able to take the .ps output of a pages doc and produce a PDF with fully embedded fonts, very few people would have a problem, but as it is, you can't.

Help me Apple Computer! You're my only hope!

I just sent this thought to Apple through the feedback page. I suggest anyone and everyone who is having trouble with not being able to fully embed fonts, or whatever solution you might like to suggest, send Apple feedback this way since I've noticed some of the power posters here say that Apple doesn't actively monitor the Forums. (Why don't they, that's just plain weird.)

To all on this topic:

Could everyone on this forum please convey their concerns to Apple via Pages Feedback and however else they know if they have not already done so.

Pages is being used in good faith for serious writing and other production intended for publication. A single user might well have a year or more's work invested. There are ways and means to everything, of course. But what would printing a book on high resolution paper on an ink-jet followed by photo litho production of offset plates do to the economics of publication?

WP and imaging software exist because print still matters. Without access to it on whatever scale is required, they are completely and utterly useless.

I doubt there could be anything more serious for Apple to address than this.
If commercial printers will not or cannot work from Apple software, anywhere in any community, then I suggest that Apple take the lead. Produce the software they need and sell it to them or update it to us - or else themselves provide a truly comprehensive printing service accessible through any Apple outlet anywhere in the world.

So how are they to do it, and how are we to tell them?

I think we'd all better campaign, at least until Apple does for us.

I've put in what I can think of. But I think it needs a flood.

Many thanks to all who can add to it.

iBook G4 Mac OS X (10.4.6)

I'm very curious about whether anyone has tried any of the other services like Xlibris, iUniverse, etc. Do they have the same problems that Lulu does with Pages output?