PageMaker, Quark, or InDesign?? 3

[myatia]

Hi,

I'm a web designer about to undertake a new design project. My company is going to be putting out a series of 32-page magazine-like programs which will include the content that we provide and ads which will be submitted by various businesses. My question is this: what program should I use to create the programs?

I have the following concerns:

1. I have a fairly extensive background in PageMaker 6.5, so that would be easiest to hit the ground running with. However, I've also been using Illustrator for our one page ads, and I really like a lot of its features (especially its text capabilities). Will upgrading to PageMaker 7.0 make a big difference, or does InDesign bridge the gap more?

2. If I do go with InDesign, is it hard to pick up, given that one has experience with the rest of the Adobe suite? At the same time, if I go with Quark, would it be a horrible experience for me to try to learn it as I go?

3. I'm going to have people submitting ads in god only knows what format (the ad specs were sent out without anyone even asking me about it), and I want as much compatibility as possible.

4. I want to work with something printers can work with. Is InDesign commonplace now? Also, I'm working on a Windows machine, but a lot of printers have Macs. Are Quark, InDesign, and PageMaker all pretty compatible between the two OSs?

5. I've done a lot of ads and tickets and other print projects, but I'm not a print designer, and I don't know much, if anything, about prepress. Which program is best in this area?

I know this is a massive question and that there's no definitive answer; I would just like to get your opinions and any other info you can provide.

Thanks!
Misty

 

[Eggles]

Where to start?

Firstly, PM 6.5 can handle all that you have described. BUT - upgrading to 7 is dependent on your OS (which you didn't mention). If you are using Win 98, there is no need to do anything. If you are using 2K or XP, you would benefit from upgrading to V7. The main differnce between 6.5 and 7 (apart from the interface as you get a tool bar with 7) is that 7 runs better on the new OSs - and which is why Adobe released V7.

That said, if you want to take advantage of all the new features that have been added in Indesign, then I would definitely choose it. Rather than go into all these features, I would recommend that you visit Adobe's website, and also the User-to-user forums there.

I wouldn't even consider Quark. It's too expensive compared to ID (particularly if you already have PM so qualify for the upgrade price to ID).

Now I will try and go back to answer your questions in logical order.

1. For creating multipage documents such as a magazine, there is no comparison between a layout program such as PM and Illustrator, as AI is confined to single pages (more or less). So it is great for things like ads, which are only ever single pages. But creating a 32 page magazine which may perhaps have stories riunning more than one page - it would be extremely difficult to do in AI. The text handling features of AI are more limited than they are in PM anyway. Probably ID would be even better.

2. Although I haven't used ID I have read a lot about it and many of the regulars here and at the U2U forum at Adobe have made the switch and they say it is really easy to pick up - particularly if you are familiar with AI (as you are).

3. The various formats that people may submit ads in can be a big problem for a lot of DTPers. You need to have Photoshop so that if necessary, you can change the formats of the graphics. PM works best if vector graphics are placed as EPS and raster graphics as TIF. ID would be similar, although it can accept native Photoshop files. You are more likely to get files submitted as JPGs or GIFs or BMPs or WMFs or anything else. Open them in PS and resave them as TIFs before putting them in your layout. This is particularly important if the publication will be commercially printed. And before I forget, remember to LINK not embed any graphics. So you must also remember to send the graphics files to the printer, as well as any fonts you have used.

4. You haven't said where you live, but more and more printers are accepting ID files. Many should also be able to accept PM files. Printers can be a bit snooty and say they will only accept Quark Mac files - if so, shop around till you find one who is happy to accept PC files from whatever program you decide to use. And if you are really stuck, you can always save your publication as a high rez PDF for sending to the printers. Make sure you check that they can do this, and also what job options they prefer with Distiller. The biggest problem when transferring files between PCs and Macs are the fonts - everything else is fine.

5. PM is great in that it has the 'Save for service provider' utility, which packages up your PM file, all the graphics and all the fonts into one folder, which you then copy to CD or zip disk to send along to the printer. Don't know how either ID or Quark do this.

The biggest differnece between web graphics and print graphics are (a) the resolution required and (b) the colour space. Print graphics for offset printing need to be 300 dpi and in CMYK format. You CANNOT successfully upsample a 72dpi web graphic to print resolution unless you can reduce the dimensions of the image by around 1/4. Otherwise it will just print pixelated and look horrible.

I recommend to get further opinions you ask at the Adobe User to User forums, particularly on the Win PM forum, as there has been a lot of recent discussion on the comparison between PM and ID - and many people who have used both.

 

[horqua]

Myatia,
Another approach to consider, by using ID, you can create your magazine for viewing on the web (72dpi) and include a link to a PDF where the viewer can download a high-quality/printable (300dpi) PDF version of your magazine. ID is great for this.


Knock and the door shall be opened unto you. Seek and ye shall find!

 

[Lett]

Myatia,

We just started using InDesign and love it. You have a great deal of flexibility with it and it has it's own preflight, which is crucial if going to "print".

The industry is leaning hard on PDF workflow and InDesign is right on track.

Rather go into great detail with subject matter you may not even use, I would suggest getting to know your printers. Find out who will be printing your work and request their prepress guidelines (the majority of printers have them readily available -- and there are variations from printer to printer). Everyone can accept a PDF. If they can't directly impose and print from it, they can most certainly import it using their application of choice.

Best of Luck!

Randy

 

[hawkster27]

After 16(!) years of working with every version of PageMaker, I'm doing more and more in InDesign. It's the only way to go. If you have any experience with PageMaker you'll love InDesign and hate Quark, I bet.

 

[myatia]

Just a followup...We did end up going with InDesign, and I absolutely adored it. For seemingly the first time ever, the printer had no problems with the documents I was sending over. I'm now at a new position where I'm just doing web stuff, but I talk to their graphic designer a lot and have recommended InDesign to her. So, in conclusion, yay InDesign!