Which edition of Acrobat

[deB]

Hi, y'all. I've just started at a new company, outside the graphic arts (gasp!), where we don't yet have publishing tools inhouse. We'll be getting Acrobat, but I'm not sure which edition to get.

I know about the official comparison matrix http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html, but I've heard of a useful feature I don't see listed: the ability to reach into a PDF and extract a content object, e.g. an embedded graphic. What do I need, to do that? (Maybe only Illustrator can do that.)

I'm also leery of a new version, specifically the not yet released version 8. I've been using 6. Aside from the bloat factor, I was very disappointed when Find was "improved" in 6. I use Find a *lot*. It used to be that Find would just hop to the first occurrence, but now it seems I have to wait while Acrobat generously searches the whole flippin' PDF. (Am I overlooking a switch to stop that behavior?)

To me that wasn't a wise product decision, so as I say, I'm leery of what other "improvements" might be lurking in 8, never mind 7. (Bitch bitch bitch.)

I'm open to third-party PDF tools, too, but I don't want them to be cheap junk stripped-down "works pretty good, most of the time" stuff, so I'm inclined to stick with the Adobe product.

Thoughts?

[Michael Rowley]

the ability to reach into a PDF and extract a content object, e.g. an embedded graphic

SolidCoverterPDF does a very good conversion of a PDF to Word, which entails extracting both text and graphics.

[ElyseC]

...useful feature I don't see listed: the ability to reach into a PDF and extract a content object, e.g. an embedded graphic. What do I need, to do that? (Maybe only Illustrator can do that.)That's how I do it — open the PDF in AI and grab what I want.

[deB]

That's how I do it — open the PDF in AI and grab what I want.

So, are y'all saying it's not something one does within Acrobat?

Am I avoiding some reality about the need to buy the whole suite? (We have no intention of becoming a whole production department, but we do want to be able to make quick & simple changes on our own. So it might behoove us to have a copy of the professional tools, even though we'd only use a smidgen of the features that our professional partners use in creating the files.)

[Franca]

Am I avoiding some reality about the need to buy the whole suite? (We have no intention of becoming a whole production department, but we do want to be able to make quick & simple changes on our own. So it might behoove us to have a copy of the professional tools, even though we'd only use a smidgen of the features that our professional partners use in creating the files.)I'm not a whole production department and I have found that I have needed the full version of Acrobat on occasion. It's sort of one of those things ... when you need it you really need it, even if it's only once in a blue moon.

I can't speak to any version later than version 5, however. I heard terrible things about version 6 when it was released, and have been making do with 5 ever since. I'm getting more and more error messages when I open newer PDFs, though, that some elements may not display properly. So far the PDFs have all looked fine to me, but one of these days I'm sure I will be forced to upgrade. Who knows ... you might actually be happier with one of the newer versions than you have been with version 6!

[donmcc]

I'd get at least one copy of the suite, if you can swing it. Nothing more frustrating than not having a tool when you need it. And it is so much easier to get software approved when you have just started a job, as opposed to later, when "we'll look it at budget time."

I don't think you can buy older versions of the software, so if you want to avoid 8, you should purchase soon, before CS2.3 hits the shelves. A bonus will be, since 2.3 has been approved, you will probably be able to get a free upgrade to Acrobat 8, and possibly to Dreamweaver.

[deB]

SolidCoverterPDF does a very good conversion of a PDF to Word, which entails extracting both text and graphics.

Woohoo, I guess so! At first blush it seems mighty impressive. I downloaded the evaluation version (only does 10% of a doc) and it seems great.

It does leave the graphic embedded in the Word document, which means I can't really see it in its original format. (Heaven knows what Word does to it, considering MS's furry-headed view of the world.) But for $49 or $99 this looks like a pretty powerful tool.

[deB]

I'd get at least one copy of the suite... if you want to avoid 8, you should purchase soon, before CS2.3 hits the shelves.

What should the whole suite cost, ballpark?

Googling, I ran across this https://shop.edirectsoftware.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=16184 which asserts "box says Academic but it's legal for commercial use."

I didn't fall off the garbage truck yesterday (yes I said garbage, not cabbage) so I'm willing to believe anything unexpected BUT I also check EVERYthing...

[Michael Rowley]

Dave:

It does leave the graphic embedded in the Word document

I suppose it does. I use it for extracting text, mainly (when people supply them for translation as uneditable PDF documents), so although I like to have the graphs etc. near the text that refers to them, I'm not bothered about the actual format. I've used it for years in various versions, but the present version of the Pro is the best yet.

The forthcoming Acrobat 8 Pro sounds pretty good: it appears that will be more useful than v. 7, but shelling out £150 for the upgrade every year is a pain. It doesn't seem very long ago that I bought Acrobat 5!

[donmcc]

> box says Academic but it's legal for commercial use."

Surprisingly, that is true. Adobe does allow the academic package to be used commercially, and to be upgraded to the commercial package with the next version.

What your vendor does not mention is that an academic package can only be sold by an academic reseller, and can only be purchased by a qualifying person (student or faculty).

[ktinkel]

So it might behoove us to have a copy of the professional tools, even though we'd only use a smidgen of the features that our professional partners use in creating the files.)You know, none of us uses more than a portion of any of these programs.

You probably cannot justify the whole suite based on how many functions you use in any one program but how many programs you need to have the tools you require. Clever Adobe: they have all the useful stuff spread around!

[Cristen Gillespie]

DeB: It does leave the graphic embedded in the Word document, which means I can't really see it in its original format.

I'm not sure what you're after, but Acrobat 7 Pro does extract images. There's a basic command: Advanced > Export all images. You can choose the file format, settings for that format, including whether to let Acrobat choose the resolution or you do (if you do, you may well be resampling).

If I use File > Open and choose Image in Photoshop, it opens the same as if I chose to export from Acrobat.

I've also opened pages in AI. Sometimes text stays put and images show up, and sometimes they go all wonky. Usually images come through just fine. But I don't get the original image in any case if it was downsampled, converted, etc. in the making of the PDF.

For text, if the text is still text, I can simply select, copy and paste into another program. If it isn't renderable, Acrobat will attempt to OCR it.

For what it's worth. Maybe something less expensive than Acrobat Pro will do what you want, but it does sound like Acrobat Pro 7, now 8, does it too.

[deB]

You probably cannot justify the whole suite based on how many functions you use in any one program...

Otoh, the pricing for the whole suite is nicer if it's an upgrade (~$1000 if not upgrade), and we do seem to have some Photoshop lying around here. So that helps.

[ktinkel]

Otoh, the pricing for the whole suite is nicer if it's an upgrade (~$1000 if not upgrade), and we do seem to have some Photoshop lying around here. So that helps.Yep. Upgrade, for sure.

[djb]

I know about the official comparison matrix http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html, but I've heard of a useful feature I don't see listed: the ability to reach into a PDF and extract a content object, e.g. an embedded graphic. What do I need, to do that? (Maybe only Illustrator can do that.)

Why do you need to do that? How often will you need to do that? Where are the PDFs that you think you need to do that to coming from? Why can the authors of those PDFs not provide you the individual elements?

[donmcc]

Clever Adobe: they have all the useful stuff spread around!

But thank goodness they have. Imagine what a beast the consolidated program holding everything would be.

Adobe Conglomerate 2.0
Minimum requirements:
Cray 2020 CPU
3 petabytes of ram
12 exabyte hard disk
40 inch monitor

[Cristen Gillespie]

donmcc: 40 inch monitor

With all those palettes, I'd never be able to see a thing on a puny 40" monitor. Better make it wall-sized... measured in feet, not inches. <BG>

[deB]

Woohoo, I guess so! At first blush it [SolidConverter] seems mighty impressive. I downloaded the evaluation version (only does 10% of a doc) and it seems great.

Replying to self here, for the benefit of future searchers or browsing visitors...

I've gotten pretty annoyed with SolidConverter, at least the trial version.

First, now when I open Acrobat it insists on starting the Windows Installer to "upgrade" something in MS Office (even MS Office isn't running). It asks for my Office CD, which is back at my old company.

Second, whatever the plug-in is that it installs in Word, it appears to be ill-behaved in its consumption of memory. After I have Word open for a while, it starts saying there's "not enough memory to display the font" and it goes into a perpetual-screen-flicker loop. I have to force-close Word.

Granted, I only have 512MB on this laptop but I've been using it for 3 years and have never had any memory complaints from any other app, so I hereby point a Sloppy Code / Bad Citizen finger at this SolidConverter thing. I'll try it again when I get my new laptop but I'm dropkicking this thing off my planet.

[Michael Rowley]

Dave:

I only have 512MB on this laptop

Word has 'leaked' memory for donkey's years; I've got only 256 Mbyte, but people with more memory (on their computers) notice it too. Word also has a tendency to ask for the Office CD for undisclosed and undiscoverable reasons, occasionally bringing Windows Installer into the act too. The fault may not be with SolidConverter, but I don't know what you get with the demonstration version; my SolidConverter Pro has recently been upgraded to v. 3.1.