RIP EPS or PDF files?

Assuming that you are creating content in versions of Adobe InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop using any transparency and/or color management, PDF is definitely the way to go. Why? The PostScript imaging model does not support either live transparency or ICC color management or any feature of the PDF imaging model beyond 1997. The PDF imaging model supports device independent live transparency, layers, ICC color management, JPEG200 compression, etc.

If you output PostScript (or EPS) for the RIP process, either for offset or digital printing, you are producing output that by definition is totally device dependent. Flattening of transparency in your original documents required for output to PostScript (or EPS) requires knowledge of the exact printing conditions including device resolution and color space. That is not necessary with PDF assuming you output PDF/X-4.

PDF offers other advantages such as the ability to print or reprint selected pages or ranges of pages, ability to easily view, search, perform touchups (if really necessary), preflight, and archive. Plus, given the compression techniques used in PDF, PDF is generally much more compact than PostScript (or EPS).

By the way, normally one would RIP PostScript files, NOT EPS, although some RIPs do allow this. It is certainly not best workflow practice.

Hopefully this gives you some idea of why the industry is most of the way through the transition to PDF print publishing workflows as opposed to those that are either PostScript-based or hybrid PDF and PostScript.

- Dov

Thanks for the info, Dov.