In Design or Quark???
- Started
- Last post
- 16 Responses
- Stoph
Any opinions out their?
- meok0
Designers will say Indesign Printers will say Quark.
- tymeframe0
that's a good summary.
- Gorbie0
either will do fine.
i moved to ID 8 months ago - and i practicall double my output.
the unfortunate thing regarding ID, is that it can do many wack effects that will cause huge problems when the printer tries to run it.
you have to be conscious of known and documented problems. things like placing transparency over gradients and such.
- rasko40
I've recently had a magazine publisher tell me that they wont accept Quark anymore, only ID. But then most places are still they other way around.
And actually in this age where printers seem to think they can call all the shots most times you end up having to make pdf's anyhow..
- Gorbie0
rasko - part of the reason for that is that many printers, including the company i work for, use a PDF workflow.
meaning, they produce PDF's of each page which then get placed into templates and get sent to the big machine that spits out the plates.
everything we get ends up a PDF. though we prefer to do that here where we can troubleshoot any problems from within the original file. As opposed to a PDF which is (basically) flattened artwork.
(did that make sense?)
- Mimio0
Even the most reputable service bureaus need their hands held when trying to get the output correct.
- Dancer0
InDesign - without a doubt
Quark has sooo many issues (including the fact it cannot spell website...)
I still use quark but would change over at a drop of a hat - work won't.
The cost of quark is rediculous
when you buy Indesign you know it will happily intergrate with PS and AI.
alot of printers I have spoken to say they want In Deesign but will not change fearing the loss of clients.
my 2pence worth
quark will die if they don't sort thier act out (and thier price)
- devaur0
Is this a joke?
InDesign is far better. Unfortunately most people have not switched from the dark side.
But atleast most printers we are working with would prefer InDesign instead of Quark. Its our clients that are the biggest pain in the ass.
- BonSeff0
does handing over a pdf to a printer somehow diminish the quality of the placed images?
i've never tried it and seem skeptical. am i nuts and a fraidy cat?
- Gorbie0
designers are often lead to believe they can do things that are - in fact - impossible.
and service bureaus shouldn't be seen as working for you. but rather, working with you.
- Gorbie0
Bon Seff,
You concern is legit. No, PDF's don't compromise quality, but as previously mentioned - PDF's are flattened and have little ability to be altered. So if there are any problems inside your PDF that you cannot see (very common) a printer cannot run your PDF - and must go back to you and have you sort it out.
The AGFA software we use here is much more sensitive to bugs inside PDF's. So problems are detected before we waste a bunch of plates.
(we are direct to plate here - no film)
- BonSeff0
i see. gracias pal
here is a hypothetical:
say a person gives you a flattened pdf, but the person forgot the convert some images from rgb to cmyk.. will the pdf make the image cmyk cause it's now flat?* see the print design exchange thread peeps
- Gorbie0
no it doesn't.
When we go to print blue lines / matchprints the Rip won't take it.
We use Pitstop:
http://www.enfocus.com/products/…with that software you can edit almost anything on a PDF - like color conversion. You can even color correct inside the PDF.
Though some problems can be very frustrating - and are better dealt with in the page layout app.
- arench0
I love InDesign for its XML features.
I've been experimenting with importing database dumps in XML and automating page layout with AppleScript. Excellent for catalogs.
- Typographica0
Here is some more proof that Quark is dead:
- ********0
neither
what's wrong with people?