[JS] CS4 - Convert all spots to process

I have what is probably a very simple question. How do I get a script to convert any of the Swatches Spot colors to CMYK?
Any help would be huge. . .

How indeed.
InDesign doesn't work with 'colors' by default; if you use a spot or process color, it gets added to the Swatch panel. Now, one way to reliably iterate over all swatch items is using 'everyItem' -- a very handy function, which I'm using more and more instead of looping over an object array. It's description is not that useful ("Returns every Xxx in the collection" -- how? what do you get?) so, usually I just try.
It didn't work because the spot/process property is just found in "Color" (under the name "model") -- not in Swatches and Inks. At first I tried to sneak around this, using a try..catch (so InDesign picks up the error and continues on the next line) and then with 'hasOwnProperty('model'). Fortunately, you can loop over just the colors.
It's just a matter of trying the first thing you come up with and reading the unavoidable error message very carefully :-)
Are you by any chance working with a Windows machine? My own version of the Javascript help (found here) also displays parent/child relations in a graphic form, and that's quite often useful. (Windows, because for the Mac I only have it as HTML.)

Similar Messages

Can I have "All spots to process" checked at all times, even for new spot colors?

When I check “All spots to process” in the pdf export settings and save my settings the settings remember that I've checked this option. But, if new spot color objects using new spot color swatches are added to the document (or another document) and I go into the pdf export settings the check mark has been changed into a dash (with the actual checkbox highlighted) – signifying that only some of of the spot colors will be changed to process colors during export. I absolutely fail to see how this could possibly be seen as a feature and not a bug … if the user has checked “ALL spots to process” wouldn't the user expect ALL spots to be converted to process colors, rather than just any spot colors that happened to be in the document that happened to be open when the user first checked that checkbox and saved that setting?
Am I missing something here? What's the point of even having that checkbox as part of your saved export settings if it doesn't include any other spot colors than those used when saving the settings?
What's the point of having settings if you can't trust them, and still need to manually "override" them every time?
I see that some users have taken to writing scripts that instead turn all spot colors in the swatch panel to process colors, and while I commend them for creating that workaround, I'm still pissed at Adobe for not getting the function right.
If this is a feature, who is it for? People who want to add just certain spot colors and turn those into process colors rather than turning all spot colors into process colors are surely better off doing that in the swatches panel, where they're in total control of what's what. And if they don't want to "permanently" change their spot colors to process colors, and prefer to (temporarily) convert them during exporting/printing only, they can do that in the ink manager. But when someone checks convert "All spots to process" couldn't we safely assume they really want ALL spot colors to be converted and not just some of them? I mean, the way that checkbox behaves now, it's like it's a button and not a checkbox. As in: hit the button "All spots to process" to switch all currently viewed spot colors to process colors in the ink manager, OR check the "All spots to process" checkbox to always convert ALL spot colors to process colors during exporting/printing.
Anyone got any light to shed on this?
And is there a way to actually get the advertised behavior, because if you have to run a script every time you export/print you might as well just manually select the checkbox every time instead, but either way it's just really unnecessary as far as I'm concerned … Adobe should get the feature right instead.
If you save a setting and recall it, it shouldn't be possible for that setting to change into something else (in this case changing a checkmark to a dash).
Clearly CMYK printing is the norm, so for most users it would make a lot of sense to have the "All spots to process" checked most of the time, and then you just go into the swatches panel or the ink manager and set things correctly for those print jobs that really do need spot colors.
I myself am not one of those who add spot colors to my swatches unless I'm really using them as spot colors, but I often work with magazines and folders featuring adverts made by whoever, and typically there's always at least one advert that features spot colors, and therefore it would be very nice if the "All spots to process" feature actually worked as advertised without any required actions from me.
We stopped sending ads back to the advertisers for adjustments a long time ago, unless we absolutely had to, because there were so many things wrong with so many ads that it was simply too much work to write back and explain everything to people who most of the time didn't even understand what we were talking about. We found that it was usually a LOT faster and easier to just adapt the ads ourselves, as long as it was something that could be worked out really quickly from within InDesign itself, which pretty much included most typical errors.
But with this feature I find Adobe is trying to make my job harder rather than easier, and it's pissing me off. Arrrghh… ;-)

But It's not a preference it's a shortcut
It's a bad joke, is what it is. ;-)
So, why in your opinion should it be presented the way it is? I keep saying in it's current functionality it shouldn't be presented the way it is (and that: if it is, it shouldn't work the way it does). If it's not a preference or even a proper checkbox, why present it that way?
If you put it right next to the table at the top of the window (so that it's directly associated with that information, rather than information right above it) and just called the checkbox “Spot(s) to process” and had it only visually reflect the content of the sleected spot colors in the table, then I'd see your point with likening it to the “Hyphenate” checkbox.
If a story has two selected paragraphs that uses two different hyphenation settings then the checkbox should present the way it does now, but if you hit the checkbox so that both paragraphs now use hyphenation and create a third paragraph inbetween the two previous ones it better inherit that setting and not turn off hyphenation for the new paragraph (unless of course there's a defined next paragraph style that switches to a style with hyphenation turned off). And if that checkbox said “Hyphenate all paragraphs” instead, then I would expect it to do just that, and not just the selected ones, and not just the current paragraphs but quite literally all paragraphs even newly created ones – otherwise it doesn't do what it says it does, and simply shouldn't be labeled that way.
And seriously bad interface design aside, you'd have to rename “All spots to process” to “Switch all currently displayed spot swatches listed in the table above to process” to actually describe what that checkbox does. So even if you're a fan of the current functionality, as opposed to one that actually lets the user set and forget a setting like that, and think it's better that users manually check it repeatedly (which I'm not saying that you are, but you're not giving me any feedback suggesting you even see my point of view with any of this, so what do I know?), then why wouldn't you still support an interface that visually matches/signals that functionality better? If it's a “Select all” checkbox supplementing a table containing a column of checkboxes, then present it that way. Don't put it at the bottom of the window next to another checkbox that works just like a regular checkbox and label it “All spots to process” – because that way you are signalling a different behavior.
Seriously, if I was to do design using the same mentality that Adobe uses when designing their user interfaces it wouldn't be long before I lost all clients. There's a lot to be said for de facto monopolies, I suppose. Oh no, there's nothing wrong with the design, just as long as you accept it on it's own terms and don't compare it to anything relevant, and just as long as you give people enough time to understand and accept it … and surrender to it.
For real … I wouldn't win one single pitch that way.
Today's threads have in many ways been a thorough reminder of the following quote from the second link I provided:
Is there an Internet rule yet stating that even the most obviously indefensible mistake will eventually be defended by someone somewhere? Awful marketing efforts get explained as genius viral campaigns, broken features become solutions.
And whether or not you're able to see my point of view or not is really besides the point too.
The real point was, and remains to be:
That for those who receive lots of ads or other external files that may or may not contain spot colors it would be far more useful to be able to set a checkbox to always convert all spots to process when exporting, than the current functionality is (and I'm not suggesting eliminating the current functionality, just change so it's presented like what it really is, and then just let that separate checkbox do what it says) … causing unnecessary manual action on the user's behalf shouldn't be the business of Adobe – preventing it should.
And here's further reading on the subject of bad Adobe interface design for those who might feel so inclined. ;-)
Cheers!

"All Spots to Process" a joke!

Using the "All Spots to Process" option in the Ink Manager box seems to be a complete waste of time, and has created 10 times more work. Since we've started using InDesign (we were religious PageMaker users) we have been taught to start with spot colors and them let InDesign change them to Process if we convert the job to a CMYK job. Up until now, it worked fine....or so we thought.
We recently (ok, well 2 years ago) bought out another company and obtained all of their digital files. The problem we had from the start was that our colors never matched. We didn't retain a single employee from the other company as it was from a different state. So we didn't know how they output their plates.
We just now found out why the "All Spots to Process" is a complete failure for a option. We had a gradient screen that went from what they called "CYAN DARKER" which was a mix of C-100 M-40 to Reflex Blue which showed a mix of C-100 M-73 Y-0 K-2. Both colors were designated "Spot Colors" Ok, fine. But when you viewed the separation preview, with "All Spots to Process" clicked, the middle of our gradient dropped the Cyan value down to 75%! When we manually changed the two Spot Colors to Process, the Cyan stayed at 100% across the entire gradient. Something that we didn't realize was happening but made our product look much more similar to the product that was carried over from the old company.
Anyone have any thoughts on the issue! Made my life a lot more time consuming, but now we can achieve the colors that we need to.

There is nothing wrong with the 'Spots to Process' functionality, it follows the rules...
It was the previous designer who didn't! They should not mix blends of Process and Spot except very rarely in a 5+ colour job maybe.
What might do the trick for you is to select 'Use Lab values' in the Ink Manager, that will apply a much more saturated colour conversion.
Another issue might be general colour management, has it been done correctly?
If you have good colour management procedures and settings in place and you use the Lab values, you should get acceptable results.

'All spots to process' Checked automatically. Please help

Hi,
I recently sent a job to print which was supposed to have 1 spot colour. It came back from the printer 4-colour with no spot and when I ckecked the artwork 'All spots to process' was checked in the Ink Manager.
I definitely did not check the box as I wasn't even aware of it and previous versions of the document show it was un-checked.
Is it possible to turn this feature on by default/automatically/by accident!? Could I have activated it elsewhere in InDesign?
Thanks
Ian

Hi lan,
Me also faced same problem i think this will be helpful to you
Just run the script before exporting the pdf file all spot colors will coverts as a CMYK
Say BIG "thank you" to Jongware. This is his script
app.activeDocument.colors.everyItem().properties = {space:ColorSpace.CMYK, model:ColorModel.PROCESS};
For more details see below link
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/732362?tstart=0
Regards,
Siva

SPOT to PROCESS: CS3-JS

Hi All,
How to convert all SPOT to PROCESS in swatch using CS3-JS?
Without changing the default swatches [Paper,Reg...]
Thanks in advance.
Sam

Hi Sam,
Use the below code to conver:
SPOT to PROCESS:
app.activeDocument.swatches.itemByRange(4,app.activeDocument.swatches.length-1).model = 1886548851;
PROCESS to SPOT:
app.activeDocument.swatches.itemByRange(4,app.activeDocument.swatches.length-1).model = 1936748404;
Regards,
Ramkumar .P

Spot to process grayed out

Thought I'd write this up in case it helps anyone. I've just spent most of the afternoon trying to find the solution, when it actually takes about 30 seconds once you know it.
The problem: Mac OSX 10.6, ID 4. On exporting a document to PDF, the "all spots to process" check box is grayed out, which creates unwanted spot colours in your PDF.
The solution: After trying various colour profiles, modifying the joboptions and generally going around in circles for ages, the solution is simply to save a copy of the document and use the copy. Obviously it's some sort of corruption of the original file, which is corrected when saved as a new document.
Hopefully, next time this happens to me, I'll remember the solution, or at least remember that I posted it here!

Never Mind, I figured out. I was trying to change the spot swatch option that is in a placed file, linked. When I embed the file, or open the original and paste in the artwork, then I can change the swatch options from Spot to Process.

How to convert a PDF's Process Black to spot color

We have been asked to build InDesign templates for a two-PMS-color math book. The design calls for two PMS colors: a dark blue for most text and red highlights.
Because our Math plug-in doesn't work easily with PMS colors (it defaults to Process black), we hope to create all the “blue” text in Process Black. The press PDFs will have two inks: Process Black and PMS red. On press they will print the black plate in our blue PMS color.
This plan works on press, but for non-press use, we also want the PDFs to visually match the blue and red printed book. Ideally we would convert the Black Process ink to a blue spot but I'm not sure if this can be done.
Question 1: Does anyone know of a way to convert Process Black in a PDF to a spot color? Pitstop can convert spot to process, but we want the reverse.
Question 2 (which I may also post in the InDesign forum) Do you know of a way to redefine (or alias?) the indesign black swatch so that it functions as a spot color?

1 - yes, you can do this with Preflight in Acrobat Pro, but it's not on the default set of fixups.
Open Preflight, select "Single fixups" - the wrench icon
Options > Create New Preflight Fixup
Give it a name (e.g. "process black to spot")
Choose the Color category in the upper right
Choose 'Convert to spot color' in the upper left
Define the source parameters in the main panel (in your case, CMYK%, 0-0-0-100 with tolerance 0)
Define the spot color to change this color into, and the alternative space for rendering (i.e. your blue color)
If you wish, add a check to limit the conversion to certain things (e.g. text, vectors, etc.)
Click OK to save the fixup, then click FIX to apply it. To verify the result, use the Output Preview dialog in Acrobat.

TS1409 How do I mass convert all my videos in iTunes From FLV to MP4?!!

My problem is a simple one that YOU will, sooner or later, face---else you already faced it. It is the DREADED mixed media from You Tube. HOW DO I MASS CONVERT MY ITUNES FLV VIDEOS TO MP4 VIDEOS. If MP4 will play Video & Audio---why do I need FLV files?
1. I have an old APLINE IDA-X001 Digital Automobile Receiver that I have ported my iPOD Classic to via their Alpine Proprietary High Speed USB2 Cable.
2. I have 800+ You Tube music videos from the 80s (what can I say, WE ARE ALL ENTOMBED IN THE MUSIC OF OUR YOUTH and I am a couple of months older than Steve Jobs---Double Nickel or should I say YEAR ZERO of our lord Rock & Roll!!!). When driving, I just want to hear the Audio Files from my iPOD.
3. 90% of said You Tube videos are in Flash Video (FLV), 10% are MP4.
4. You can only play FLV on outputs that have videos, MP4 videos can play in video mode else audio only mode---THEREFORE I NEED TO CONVERT all my FLVs to MP4s on my iPOD Classic (160GB).
5. Yes, there are a handful of FREE Video Converter programs out there and the one I have AV8 will convert FLV to MP4 one file at a time...drip,drip,drip!!!
6. I have 800+ Music Videos---I will have died from old age before my iPod is filled.
7. My DESIRED END STATE is to flip a software switch and have all my iPOD FLV videos magically convert to MP4
8. You Tube Download Modality: I find a song I like and Download it to RealPlayer. Once downloaded, I PAINFULLY convert it to Ipod (can't do more than 9 songs at a time). Once in iTunes, I sync it to my iPOD classic and bam---my videos are in my my iPOD.
9. Currently, the only songs that play on my iPOD are those I've purchased from iTunes.
10. Whudda I Do? The Apple Tech guys haven't a clue. Also. If I can only do it manually (I've got movies mixed in as well), how do I set up an MP4 folder and then only transfer that folder on to my iPOD?!!!

The sync process for contact information, calendar events and bookmarks is bidirectional.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=306071
The sync process for iTunes content and photos transferred from your computer to the iPhone is in one direction only and can be synced with iTunes on one computer only.
iTunes includes an option to transfer content purchased from the iTunes Store only from an iPod or iPhone - not for content acquired elsewhere that was transferred from iTunes to your iPhone.
You need to transfer your iTunes library from your Windows PC to your Mac.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304721
http://www.apple.com/support/switch101/

Convert CMYK+SPOT (only selected bands) to RGB

Hello,
My context:
I am dealing with multi-band TIFF files - CMYK + one or more SPOT colors.
I am able to read the multi-band TIFF file using JAI and read the number of bands correctly.
Also, I can read the value for any band for any pixel.
For the SPOT colors I have Pantone CMYK equivalents.
The bands are 8 bit in size.
My problem:
I need to be able to show/hide one or more bands and display the result.
Is there a (mathematical) formula for converting CMYK+SPOT color bands to the RGB color space?
A simple example:
(CMYK scale 0-100)
All bands: C, M, Y, K, SPOT1 (C=100,M=100,Y=0,K=0), SPOT2(C=100,M=0,Y=100,K=0)
Bands selected: C, M, SPOT1
PixelX values: C = 50, M = 10, SPOT1=80
Can we calculate PixelX's RGB values to display on screen?
Is there any documentation I can read anywhere on the subject?
Thanks in advance,
Georgi

While I have never tried it, you might find this interesting: [cmyk to rgb|http://bytes.com/topic/java/answers/16180-rgb-cmyk].

Convert all images to DNG without stopping for errors

When I convert images to dng format i don't sit around by my computer and wait for them all to convert. I have better things to do. I will go run an arrand or convert a bunch while i go to sleep. The problem is that lightroom stops converting when it encounters an error. Can you make a feature that will skip the picture with the error and log it to a log book so I know which ones didn't get converted. This way, when i come back to my computer the next day, I don't have to start the long agonizing process all over again, I can just work with the error photos to see what the problem is.
The same problem could happen with importing, or exporting, or converting to jpeg and exporting. These are all very time consumeing batch processes that need to have the option to skip error photos and log them to a log book instead of suspending the whole export, import, etc.
Thanks!!!!!

I want to claw back some space from iTunes by making all my music AAC, as this seems to be about two thirds file size compared to AIFF and MP3.
This is incorrect.
AAC and MP3 are almost identical in files size at the same bit rate.
At 128 kbps, songs are ~ 1 MB per minute.
At 128 kbps, file sizes are ~1/10th the size of AIFF or WAV.
Is there a quick way to do this without duplicating each file in the process using export?
You don't use export to convert songs.
Ideally, you want to convert from the best quality file (the CD) available.
Converting from one lossy format (AAC or MP3) to another lossy format will further degrade the quality.
If you want to convert all your music to AAC;
Open iTunes prefs -> Advanced - Importing.
Select AAC 128 kbps. This is the default and a good compromise between size and quality. MP3 at 128 kbps will not be as good as AAC at 128 kbps.
Select all the songs you want to convert.
Go to menu Advanced -> Aconvert selections to AAC.
Once it has finished, you can delete the old files.
To find them easily, menu Edit -> View options and select Kind.
Click on this box in the column header to sort on this. Delete the files which are not AAC.

Converting infopackage groups to process chain!

Hi,
We are planning to go for upgradation in near future!
i was asked to convert all infopacakges group schedules to a process chain schedules as infopackage groups are no longer supported in BI 7( ???? i do not why BI 7 would not support Infopacakge groups)
Requirement now is to make process chains out of infopacakge groups
i am little puzzeled of how to model process chain as there are too many infopacakges in groups and there are quite a lot of groups as well
Any tips?
Raj

Hi Raj,
You can still do Info package groups through RSA1OLD. Info package groups are outdated
1) infopackage group you can only schedule infopackages. You would still need to do the other steps manually. Whereas in process chains you can schedule all the steps. In process chains, you can also specify complex rules like, start 6th infopackage only when 1st and 5th have completed.
2) The disadvantage of Infopackage groups is that it is outdated and there won't any new features in them. So let us say that you wanted to implement a data loading logic which can be done by process chains, it might be too late as you would have created a lot of IP Groups by that time. infopackage group..scope is limited to just infopackage..that too they run one-by-one..not in parallel..
infopakge groups if any info package fails we need to trigger all the loads
manualy .where as in Process chains just correct that particular ipak and repeat from that particular process .it will take care abt remaing subsequent chains .
And also we can trigger parallel loads as well in this. Its much user friendly in
monitoring.
Dont worry about modelling . All the related Info Packages will be in one group. You need to see the flow and Design such that have info package and then DTP. and see if many data targets have same data source.then you can have only one infopackage and filtering through many DTP's.

Converting Infopackage groups to process chains

Hi guys,
I was wondering if you could assis me on how to convert an Infopackage group to a process chain? I am in RSA1OLD [in BI7], and i am trying to convert all Infopackage groups to process chains. If you could explain how to do it step-by-step it will be helpful. Thanks in advance

Hi,
1. Goto prcess chain maintenance screen (RSPC)
2. Create new Process Chain
3. Create variant for Start process (Give description and Tech. name).
4. From process types select "Infopackage" and drag it to the process chain window.
5. Select Infopackages used in Infopackage Group (one bu one)
6. Link thes processes as per the execution sequence in Infopackage group.(Click on process and drag to the other process)
7. Activate the process chain.
Regards
SS

Converting all my lightroom files to DNG

I have been thinking of converting all my pictures that is under Lightroom's control to DNG. Should a use the bulk convertor or something else? Will Lightroom be confused by the conversion. Do I have to resync everything? What is the process for converting everything.
douglas

I think the easiest way to convert to DNG is to use that conversion feature within Lightroom. You will be given the choice of whether or not to keep your original raw files, or to replace them with the DNG files. If you choose to replace then Lightroom will automatically know where the DNG files are located. If you use the DNG converter then it will be necessary for you to manually delete your original raw files if you choose to do that. And then it will be necessary for you to import the DNG files into Lightroom.

Considerations when designing for spot vs. process color?

I'm helping a friend start up a clothing business. It's just him, and I'm providing some computing knowledge.
He is the designer and has been building his first set of graphics using AI.
He's selected the first two "printers". He ran into some price differences with a vendor that used spot colors vs. one that was process. I could give him a basic understanding of spot vs. process, but ran out of understanding when it came to questions like "Why the price difference?".
Would appreciate some explanation for things like "What kind of printers would shops with spot be using vs. those that do process?", "As the designer, are there reasons he would choose one method over the other?".
He will be producing both embroidered and printed media on different fabrics (cap, 2-3 different quality cloth). There will be different colors (for a particular design), and the size and location of the print/embroidery will vary (on the garment). All in all, there will be less than 12 variations each for color, size, and 12 location.
Along with the spot/process question, he's also being asked for different formats than he'd expect. Given my understanding that AI produces vector, if a vendor (the embroidery shop) asks for JPEGs, are they assuming he's done the scaling?
Will continue to do online searches and will post back if I figure this out.
Tom

The print shops should be able to explain the price difference and which one is more durable (depends on the printing process). Probably the one using spot colors does screen printing.
Regarding the embroidery: you should definitely clearly communicate which size the embroidery should be. It can be scaled within some limit, but you shouldn't rely on the service people interpreting the graphic's size and resolution.

HT1550 i want to convert all my old music which is in Wap mp3 ect keeping these but putting a fully library of these tunes into itunes. at present is only send over 17 gb of 62gb do I need to get some sort of converter for the music. Any help would be gr

Can anyone help, I have lots of music on my computer for my old mp3 player, I want a copy of this music in my itunes file.
When I go to do this is only converts a very small amount of the music into itunes - 17gb of 62gb. Do i need a peice of software to convert all the files??
Please help me I have tried everything, I cant delete all the songs in itunes again...
Thank you so much

Helen,
If they are MP3s, you can simply add them to iTunes without conversion.
If they are in a format that iTunes cannot handle, you need convert them first, with a converter.

[JS] CS4 - Convert all spots to process

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for