Slashdot Mirror
What Software/Platform for Print Publishing?
Howzer asks: "What's the deal with publishing these days? I remember clearly the old Quark vs Pagemaker wars, the winner being Quark, on a Mac, end of argument. But that was the late 90s. These days the three products I seem to be hearing about are Quark, Publisher, and InDesign. I'd love to get some opinions on platform/software and the current state of play, as it seems I may have to have an opinion on this soon. I thank you, the designers who'll soon be working for us thank you, and the people who'll be reading our 120 page glossy monthly magazine thank you." What publishing software gives you the best performance and features for the money?
I use InDesign, but I have to admit that I can't compare it to the other ones because I've not used versions of them more recent than 10 years ago.
Things I like about InDesign:
What I don't like:
Overall, I think it's a great program. And it's highly extensible, but any non-trivial extentions (e.g. good footnoting) are v. expensive.
Quark on a Mac. End of argument and end of this stupid thread. Last one out, get the lights.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
It's not quite as refined as Quark, but it has much potential, and each 'official' release is making great strides.
Save yourself over $2k, compile Scribus in *BSD or Linux.
Publisher? Be serious.
Adobe? Better, but still not quite there.
Quark? Horrible. But its better than the others. As sad as that is.
I used to work at a place that did all their stuff in Word, then exported it all to PDF. Talk about a nightmare. Then they hired a 'graphic artist' who moved everything to Publisher. Not much better. Later on they hired another girl who used Adobe. Quite a bit better, but still not quite it.
Guess who's stuck doing everything now, in Quark on a blue G3?
Me.
Cheap computer on Ebay? $399
High-speed internet? $19.99
Getting the fewest replies ever on a Slashdot post?
Priceless
There are some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's Slashdot.
Someone has to mention it sooner or later, and it might as well be me: LaTeX!
I've been using latex for a few months, including writing a research paper. Placement of figures can be a pain, but for text it is reasonably intuitive. All the formatting trivia is abstracted away, and you can concentrate on just writing. It's math features are nice, too, if you need them.
-jim
This has been an ongoing debate for years...
My humble input is as follows:
1) The Mac or PC issue - all of the applications in professional use are feature identical between the platforms.
2) The performance angle - sure a Mac can beat a PC on the Unsharp Mask filter (but for $1000-2000 more), and it really isn't a significan portion of anyone's day. Save yourself a buck (or $2000) and buy a PC.
3) Which Application - Quark was the superior program for many years, but they killed themselves by not coming out with a new version for what 4+ years? PageMaker is most shop's standard, with many transitioning over to InDesign. Ultimately I suppose you can use any app, as long as you can create a CLEAN PDF.
Summarized: Adobe Apps on a PC (Sorry, It's the real world).
I imagine this will draw some flak from the various independent designer's out there, but the reality is if you are working for yourself - you can use whatever you want. If you want to collect a paycheck, know a PC, don't be a Mac zealot, and create layouts that actually output to film.
I have worked in the industry for years (for a specialty book printer) and this is how we go about business. We will take any platform, any file-format - but we use PC's in-house running PageMaker, InDesign & Acrobat.
Right, I set up these kinds of networks for a living, so I suppose I'm qualified to speak about it...
First - TIME IS MONEY.
Don't waste time dicking around with "free" software to try and save some money, I don't care what anyone says.
GIMP is nowhere near as good as Photoshop *for the kind of tasks you will be using it for*
Quark 6.0 is shite, Quark 6.1 is making inroads in getting back up on it's throne, but I think it's too little, too late. If you already have a substantial investment in Quark, then upgrading to 6.1 is not such a bad idea, however if you're setting up from scratch, forget it.
Get a PowerMac G5, Dual CPU if possible, and a nice monitor - DO NOT skimp on the monitor, you will have problems with clarity and colour.
Get the Adobe Creative Suite - Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat. You're essentially paying for Photoshop and InDesign and getting Illustrator and Acrobat for free.
I personally prefer Macromedia FreeHand, but I'm in the minority there - if you're doing any web based design, however, Macromedia Studio MX 2004 is excellent. Once again, you save money over getting the individual components and Dreamweaver (IMHO) is better than GoLive.
Get a two button mouse, like a Microsoft Intellimouse Optical. Don't skimp on the mouse, it's like getting a BMW and then whacking a steering-wheel on it held together by gaffer tape.
If you're getting multiple machines, get a half-decent machine as the server (Quicksilver or Mirror Drive Doors G4 or higher) and use some fast disks in it. RAID if possible. BACK IT UP.
AIT or LTO are good, if expensive, tape options, but worth every cent when you recover that file you've been working on for a whole week that you deleted.
You can do similar work on a PC, but when you go to output the files to film or plate, people will look at you funny and assume you don't know what you're doing if the files came from a PC.
Last, but not least, Fonts.
Piracy on fonts is now being treated like piracy on software. Fonts aren't too expensive, if you're paying for your software, you can afford fonts too. Less is more with fonts, don't use too many! Also, get the "brand name" versions of fonts, not the cheap knockoffs. It will look better, they will work reliably and have proper kerning tables and things like that.
k:.
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
OK short story is that I've used Mac, Linux, NeXtstep(OPENSTEP), and Windows... and Used various programs from Aldus Pagemaker, Adobe Framemaker for NeXT, Create, Gimp, TeX, Quark, Adobe Pagemaker 5 on (to now 7), InDesign 1.5 on... Coral Draw, Freehand, Illustrator, Paint Shop Pro, Photoshop and Publisher since 95 AND working in a print shop as it's graphic artist for the last 8 years I've come to a few conclusions. Quark is over-priced, over-buggy, and over-outdated. (Note last version I bothered trying to use was 4.1 outside some 5.0 time at a Kinkos) Pagemaker is vry easy to use but have numerous little things that like a Mac you can get used to always doing the ritual you have to do to get it to work. But it's easy to use and I'll suggest it to anyone... noting the cost. Publisher is great for a business to do some quick papers... it's getting there in the area of getting the job to the press... but I only suggest it either to businesses or non profits trying to save money. As for the Mac vs Windows war... ther eis very little diffeence in speed and intuitiveness... both can be just as fast an dintuitive... give some use. As mch as I hate to say it... Micro$oft has gotten better at not crashing as much... and Apple is still too expensive for the masses... and most print shops and starting to be even service bureaus. As for graphics... Photoshop is the clear winner. Paintshop Pro is cheap and powerful... but clumbersome. Corel has some natural drawing programs... but not enough power. The gimp has promise... if they ever simplify. Photoshop is just eh winner in this catagory. For illustration... I've seen 3 main programs used.. and worked with all 3... Corel Draw, which is ok... just don't expect Service Bureaus and Print Shops to have an easy time with the file... Macromedia Freehand, really could have promise... it's a nice layout and actually it's eps output and files sent to tshops have "fewer" problems but... Illustrator, time and again this programs power, accuracy and abilities make it the choice that I've stuck with. So what do I use (if you couldn't tell): Photoshop for photo touch up and image manipulation Illustrator for logo creation, complicated jobs that require a lot of tricks and graphic work (see creavet) Pagemaker for page layout and most design. It's simple and fast to use day in and day out. InDesign has a lot to offer and it's gotten a lot better from the program that used to gather dust on my hard drive. It's power with the text allows me to step back from how much I used Illustrator and I'm able to do even more elaborate things easier. As for Linux... I'd use it more if the programs that ran on it where more intuitive... and or powerful. So given the state of progress so far... maybe 5-10 years down the road.
Patrick Havens (Mr. 573333 to you.) Graphic Artist / Coder / Father / Journeler
heh... How about with some formatting...
OK short story is that I've used Mac, Linux, NeXtstep(OPENSTEP), and Windows... and Used various programs from Aldus Pagemaker, Adobe Framemaker for NeXT, Create, Gimp, TeX, Quark, Adobe Pagemaker 5 on (to now 7), InDesign 1.5 on... Coral Draw, Freehand, Illustrator, Paint Shop Pro, Photoshop and Publisher since 95 AND working in a print shop as it's graphic artist for the last 8 years I've come to a few conclusions.
Quark is over-priced, over-buggy, and over-outdated. (Note last version I bothered trying to use was 4.1 outside some 5.0 time at a Kinkos)
Pagemaker is vry easy to use but have numerous little things that like a Mac you can get used to always doing the ritual you have to do to get it to work. But it's easy to use and I'll suggest it to anyone... noting the cost.
Publisher is great for a business to do some quick papers... it's getting there in the area of getting the job to the press... but I only suggest it either to businesses or non profits trying to save money.
As for the Mac vs Windows war... ther eis very little diffeence in speed and intuitiveness... both can be just as fast an dintuitive... give some use. As mch as I hate to say it... Micro$oft has gotten better at not crashing as much... and Apple is still too expensive for the masses... and most print shops and starting to be even service bureaus.
As for graphics... Photoshop is the clear winner. Paintshop Pro is cheap and powerful... but clumbersome. Corel has some natural drawing programs... but not enough power. The gimp has promise... if they ever simplify. Photoshop is just eh winner in this catagory.
For illustration... I've seen 3 main programs used.. and worked with all 3... Corel Draw, which is ok... just don't expect Service Bureaus and Print Shops to have an easy time with the file... Macromedia Freehand, really could have promise... it's a nice layout and actually it's eps output and files sent to tshops have "fewer" problems but... Illustrator, time and again this programs power, accuracy and abilities make it the choice that I've stuck with.
So what do I use (if you couldn't tell):
Photoshop for photo touch up and image manipulation
Illustrator for logo creation, complicated jobs that require a lot of tricks and graphic work (see creavet)
Pagemaker for page layout and most design. It's simple and fast to use day in and day out.
InDesign has a lot to offer and it's gotten a lot better from the program that used to gather dust on my hard drive. It's power with the text allows me to step back from how much I used Illustrator and I'm able to do even more elaborate things easier.
As for Linux... I'd use it more if the programs that ran on it where more intuitive... and or powerful. So given the state of progress so far... maybe 5-10 years down the road.
Patrick Havens (Mr. 573333 to you.) Graphic Artist / Coder / Father / Journeler
I've now done several 60 page full-color books and smaller greyscale stuff with InDesign and love it.
I agree with the Word styles, they are a pain and mess things up more than help; I demand all text as rtf or plain text now. The composing is not as good as Pagemaker's as well.
Problems I had with pagemaker are gone: The dreaded 'bad index file', crashes and lockups.
I can't really speak to indexing and footnotes as I haven't had reason to use them as of yet, but I couldn't see using anything other than InDesign.
Platform: We had designers who were fluent in the Mac world and only slightly less fluent in the PC world. One thing we decided at the outset was that religious wars wouldn't be tolerated in the decisionmaking process -- we paid people to design and to be technically competent enough to pick up a new OS if they needed to, not to evangelize.
We ended up deciding on PCs for a variety of reasons specific to our operation (I won't bore you with those), but the common reason boiled down to simple customer service: We surveyed our clients and vendors (in that order of priority). Most clients were on PCs and were more comfortable with PCs, so that's what we aligned ourselves with.
* Program: For us, the comparative process came down to questions of:
- What would allow us to optimize our workflow? Time is money, and so we looked at our workflow (both overall and client-specific) and developed a checklist of what our must-haves were.
- What would cost the least overall? Purchase price is *not* the major cost of the software decision -- for us, we factored in what downtime would cost, what the value-over-time of the warranty and tech-support policies were, etc.
- Where was the software in its life cycle? Simply put, we wanted to get a product in the "sweet spot" that was past version 1.x and not yet near the end of its life. This question pretty much eliminated Pagemaker for us -- a product that has been repositioned and kluged to death.
Ultimately, we looked at Framemaker (too geared to technical publishing) Quark 5.x, Quark 6.x and Adobe InDesign. We settled on Quark 5.x and stuck with it past the introduction of 6.x because of stability issues. We have one publication running on InDesign, with an anticipated 12-18 month cycle for migrating over. We'll probably always have at least one Quark installation because some clients just refuse to switch.Hope this helps!
"It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
I particularly appreciate those who really took the time and sketched out their experiences, as that's just gold. Key points mentioned several times above include taking note of the existing user proficiencies, client machines, and film machines. We'll defn. be taking those into account.
One word on "that sentence" in my original submission: I was in no way hinting at platform wars or stating my personal preferences. I was just reflecting what had been said to me countless times during the late 90's. Everyone who responded with more than one line got that, I think. Thanks again!
I agree fully with the above comments - on the button. Freehand is great (my preference too) but Illustrator is king. Only one addition to the above - get an Ecrix VXA Firewire Backup drive. They are the best backup device for the mac since sliced bread (or if you have heaps of $$$, get a 10 tape VXA autoloader).
Let me ask you this question:
Are you any good? Have you got experience with magazines and newspapers?
Like most applications now adays both Quark and InDesign comes with a lot more possibilities than required for the normal user. So if you're not really pro and creative, you won't need many of the features.
I use Quark at my daily work in a norwegian newspaper, and we don't really need more than quark 4.11! I have tried quark 5 and 6, and they are better, but mostly I don't need the new features.
Further, Quark has less features than Indesign, in the normal edition, BUT there are like 1.000 pro plugins for Quark, and thus you can add features you need.
I think Quark is better if speed is one of the requirements in the workflow. My newspaper uses from 10 minutes to 1 hour per page.
Also, Photoshop is still the best, though the gap between it and other programs has decreased.
Illustrator is the winner when creating vector-grafikk etc.
Windows is cheaper than mac.
I use Quark 5 on Windows at my current gig, used to use Quark 4 on Mac OS 9. I'm OS-Agnostic, but we have found that printers we deal with prefer Mac, as they claim the font metrics are more precise, i.e. for a long book, you won't have a surprise that causes you to have to add one page, which has been known to happen on Windows Quark.
Check with your printer.
I see no cost-justifiable reason to upgrade from Quark 4 to Quark 5 in my experience, except for the old 'compatibility' bugaboo.
Most of these programs have a million unused features... if only I could trade features for stability!
Mac OS-X Quark 6.0 was rather unstable, the people I know who use it are glad they kept 5.0 installed!
I like Freehand for logo design, but everyone I know uses Illustrator. Illustrator has a harsher learning curve, with rather annoyingly abstract error messages that you need a manual to understand.
We tried Adobe InDesign, very slow, a bit too much of everything. Honestly, I don't use many of the new features in either Quark or Photoshop, I'd be happy with versions about 3 years old for both of them except for photoshop's "save-to-web' feature.
It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools, and most good designers can do great work with old software, sometimes it's easier... unless they just graduated from a school with "the latest software", they probably have experience with older versions.
One of our printers calls pagemaker "PageFaker" he despises it and the people who use it, but probably for reasons that come from situations he experienced a long time ago, they may no longer be valid assumptions.
NOTE: Two monitors is a major production speed improvement, you can have the menu clutter on one screen and the design on the other, so you aren't constantly moving stuff around to see what you're doing. I'd rather forgo a software upgrade and get annother monitor/video card.