Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
hey graphics people, what do you prefer to use?
- Thread starter jefhatfield
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Originally posted by Nemesis
Uber, you're out of your mind.
QuarkXpress is an ice-age app with an outdated interface and crippled functionality. Change and serving better their customers also is not their religion.
You're on crack, UberInDesign is a modern app. Works excellent.
I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with you there. I am in the printing/design industry, and evryone I talk to from design houses, or other print shops pretty much feel the same thing. "Indesign sucks, and will never take Quark." I never get ID files to output. When I ask them why they don't switch, they said they tried it, and it stunk. I have no opinion on the matter as I have not tried it yet, but the people I talk to say the same thing.
from the profile of ubergeek: Birthday February 24, 1989
Doesn't look like she's a long time user...
You just confirmed something that is not an issue regarding InDesign's capabilities and it's modern architecture.
If printers rely on openning original Quark files and then ripping them, I only have to say they still live in stone age. That's a very, very, very old practice that yields poor results, because so many factors can ruin your design and final output. Missing or different font descriptions are just one issue.
Today, hi-quality printing houses accept PDF as a standard. It's platform independent, all design content you produce is inside of it, fonts, pics, page info, everything. It's perfect.
You're a designer, you should also know more about creating postscript files from any DTP applicaton, QuarkXPress, PageMaker, Illustrator or InDesign... So if you're able to create a correct PS files using settings provided to you by your printer, it really doesn't matter which tool you're using. You just provide them PS file (because they have to do the same thing from your Quark file, get it?) and that's it.
So, you see, we were actually talking about funtionality, which app is really better and more user-friendly in many different senses.
Printers, specially small printers, are people opposed to any positive change, and generally they are not ready to upgrade their services. They run ancient hardware, even more ancient software and they never upgrade their rip software. Screw them. They'll all die like dinousars did.
i haven't really used InDesign much. I keep intending to switch - it's on my hard-drive! - but I'm so much quicker with Quark, and in this business time is money...
However I won't be upgrading to Quark 6 when it goes OS X native. I think Adobe need to be rewarded for developing a superior tool and for treating its customers with respect. I just need a spare weekend to sit down and get used to it.
I use Dreamweaver and BBEdit for (X)HTML/PHP etc. I use Flash and Fireworks for most other things. Except i edit pics in photoshop rather than Fireworks (because it's what i know best). I never use ImageReady; it takes forever to launch, and often crashes.
I hate M$ HTML.
However I won't be upgrading to Quark 6 when it goes OS X native. I think Adobe need to be rewarded for developing a superior tool and for treating its customers with respect. I just need a spare weekend to sit down and get used to it.
I use Dreamweaver and BBEdit for (X)HTML/PHP etc. I use Flash and Fireworks for most other things. Except i edit pics in photoshop rather than Fireworks (because it's what i know best). I never use ImageReady; it takes forever to launch, and often crashes.
I hate M$ HTML.
I am a graphic designer and have been for 5 years , stuff that I use in no order ,
OS 9.2 , Photoshop 5.5 cus six sucks up to much ram for whats its worth and seven i don't have a need for, Illustrator 9 cus i don't have ten , Quark cus I am faster in that than Indesign , fontographer , Streamline , Flash 4-5-MX , Fireworks MX , Dreamweaver , BB edit 6 , Director , ei 5 and up , suitcase 10 , netscape 4.7 and up and a **** load of others such as after effects , reason , final cut pro , Deck , peak , Premiere, and much much more ...
OS 9.2 , Photoshop 5.5 cus six sucks up to much ram for whats its worth and seven i don't have a need for, Illustrator 9 cus i don't have ten , Quark cus I am faster in that than Indesign , fontographer , Streamline , Flash 4-5-MX , Fireworks MX , Dreamweaver , BB edit 6 , Director , ei 5 and up , suitcase 10 , netscape 4.7 and up and a **** load of others such as after effects , reason , final cut pro , Deck , peak , Premiere, and much much more ...
maybe it's like playing tennis or basketball
anyone can learn to play relatively quickly, but it takes many years to be a master
the crazy thing about learning microsoft windows is that it takes too long just to learn the basics and as for mastery, i don't know anybody who cares to go that far with the thing
the more i see people learn about windows, and see its quirks and weaknesses, the more they seem interested in trying out a mac, linux os, or chucking the windows machine out the window
neither program is as easy to use as microsoft works word processor, for instance, but i also find photoshop easier to use than illustrator
maybe i am just not that artistic
Originally posted by jefhatfield
neither program is as easy to use as microsoft works word processor, for instance, but i also find photoshop easier to use than illustrator
maybe i am just not that artistic
ii've been messing around with illustrator for about two years now, and just decided to get serious about it. i've begun working with zaxwerks in AE, and i needed to learn illustrator in order to have source material to use in zaxwerks. it's a very cool program. i'm still a huge fan of photoshop, though. i just love the interface. it was my first "real" program back in the day, so i guess it will always have a spot in my heart.
I have both. I've been called a couple times in the last year to freelance on-site
for companies that use InDesign and I was able to learn it overnight on one of those on-line self-paced learning sites. Sure, there's a lot that's different from Quark, but if you're a die hard and don't want to learn new keystrokes, you can easily set up InDesign's keystrokes to emulate Quark's.
I can understand the resistance to change. But to say InDesign "sucks" just shows the level of maturity of the user. Guess what? Compared to Quark, Dreamweaver and Flash suck too. So does Final Cut. They're different too.
I'll admit that InDesign is much easier to output PDFs from (of course). And I never have a problem outputting files because I rarely send native Quark or InDesign files anyway. Mostly PDFs.
Naturally, Quark is the standard. But there's nothing wrong with InDesign. In fact, there's a lot right about InDesign. Namely, OS X functionality.
But they're 2 totally different programs, that do 2 totally different things.....
I can't believe you'd have so much problem learning any Adobe software... they all share a similar inherent GUI that means that it's easy to learn and to intergrate with other Adobe packages.... unlike Macromedia that really doesn't have a clue when it comes to GUI intergration amongst its products....
Beat me to it!
Illustrator has it's uses and so does photoshop, sure there can be overlap, but if you look at any one task, one or the other is better for it.
Illustrator requires a basic understanding of vector theory to make use of it properly whereas photoshop at the start has a slightly less steep learning curve in terms of theory(on the other hand if i see one more lens flare i'm going to be tempted to ram the sun up the designers ass and tell him to look at the pretty lens flare).
Like programming languages power often equates closely to ease of use. Perl is piss easy to learn, but limited, C++ on the other hand is a MoFo to pick up but once you do, you can do anything. Photoshop though can accododate any level of experience quite well, it's getting better too, Actions rock =)
Indesign is nice, damn nice, as a long time photoshop and illustrator user i found it dead easy to pick up, was able towork efficiently within a couple of days.
Originally posted by jefhatfield
neither program is as easy to use as microsoft works word processor, for instance, but i also find photoshop easier to use than illustrator
maybe i am just not that artistic
Illustrator is easy any muppet can use it . If you are serious about getting it the creative media industry you need to learn Illustrator or freehand or some kind of vector application , being artistic has nothing to do with it , its a tool and a very easy one at that ... if you can't get your head around vector applications and there uses and know how to use them I would re think your career path. 2400 dpi Bitmap logos at 5000mm x 2000mm would love to see that
Originally posted by alkil47
People who use photoshop filters make me sick ...
like foreground to background gradients? ugh. disgusting.
I skimmed this post and had to remember a Dilbert cartoon:
The girl holding her fist back saying: "Must control Fist-of-Death!"
I work as a designer and know design and layout programs on a very high level. I beta test InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop - a lot of fun.
The programs listed here are tools - nothing more. When someone says Quark rules and InDesign sucks, or that they prefer to draw everything in Photoshop vs Illustator, is like comparing a utility knife to an exacto knife, or a Rotring pen to a compass. They are all designed and updated to do a specific task.
That's why I cannot understand why people insist designing a brochure in Illustrator, or a whole book in Freehand or CorelDraw (multipage support i guess) - these things will have to be output to a device independent PS file, plate by plate. But how you get to those plates matters. USE THE MOST EFFICIENT TOOLS!
If you prefer Quark, that's fine - but if I am your client and ask for a PDF of the 250 page book you were working on - how long does it take for you to produce that?
If I can learn a set of keyboard commands I will be many times faster and more productive than going through menus and windows - and if I can use the same shortcuts in my most frequently used applications, it's a win-win situation.
If I can avoid using clipping paths and have soft feathered outlines - that's a life saver and a money saver. In Quark, you have to have a clipping path to knock out the background of an EPS - in InDesign, take a tranparent background image with layers, place it, and the soft feather to transparent will remain.
And I could go on.
From personal experience: Photoshop 7, Illustrator 10 and InDesign 2 are the way to go for print.
PS:
Quark is coded in India by coders that have never worked in the industry and have a hard time communicating with beta testers. The program is a spaghetti of legacy code, and is almost impossible to implement new features. The best comparison I heard came from an ex-Quark programmer:
"Quark is like an old house, remodeled numerous times over the decades, but the blueprints were misplaced. When you walk in and turn on the lights, the toilet flushes."
The girl holding her fist back saying: "Must control Fist-of-Death!"
I work as a designer and know design and layout programs on a very high level. I beta test InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop - a lot of fun.
The programs listed here are tools - nothing more. When someone says Quark rules and InDesign sucks, or that they prefer to draw everything in Photoshop vs Illustator, is like comparing a utility knife to an exacto knife, or a Rotring pen to a compass. They are all designed and updated to do a specific task.
That's why I cannot understand why people insist designing a brochure in Illustrator, or a whole book in Freehand or CorelDraw (multipage support i guess) - these things will have to be output to a device independent PS file, plate by plate. But how you get to those plates matters. USE THE MOST EFFICIENT TOOLS!
If you prefer Quark, that's fine - but if I am your client and ask for a PDF of the 250 page book you were working on - how long does it take for you to produce that?
If I can learn a set of keyboard commands I will be many times faster and more productive than going through menus and windows - and if I can use the same shortcuts in my most frequently used applications, it's a win-win situation.
If I can avoid using clipping paths and have soft feathered outlines - that's a life saver and a money saver. In Quark, you have to have a clipping path to knock out the background of an EPS - in InDesign, take a tranparent background image with layers, place it, and the soft feather to transparent will remain.
And I could go on.
From personal experience: Photoshop 7, Illustrator 10 and InDesign 2 are the way to go for print.
PS:
Quark is coded in India by coders that have never worked in the industry and have a hard time communicating with beta testers. The program is a spaghetti of legacy code, and is almost impossible to implement new features. The best comparison I heard came from an ex-Quark programmer:
"Quark is like an old house, remodeled numerous times over the decades, but the blueprints were misplaced. When you walk in and turn on the lights, the toilet flushes."
Originally posted by alkil47
Or an Alien comes out and blows up your blocks hehe ...
or when you open the app, your name, address, and likes/dislikes are sent to the fortune 500 and all the major porno websites
oops, that's not quark...that's microsoft
Originally posted by jefhatfield
or when you open the app, your name, address, and likes/dislikes are sent to the fortune 500 and all the major porno websites
oops, that's not quark...that's microsoft
I don't mind the prono sites , but not those fortune 500 wankers.
Nemisis sad it all.
Thank you very much,
I have been in the field for 9 years now.
Deal with printers in Honk Kong, LA , NYC.
all accept the same file. - PDF
And if you want to make all those extra steps to simply import a file with transperancy go for it. waste your time, in the mean time im five designs ahead of you and stole your business.
indesign will take quark.
have you seen the beta of quark 6?
how long has it been around compared to indesign. wait till indesign is at version 6.
lol
Thank you very much,
I have been in the field for 9 years now.
Deal with printers in Honk Kong, LA , NYC.
all accept the same file. - PDF
And if you want to make all those extra steps to simply import a file with transperancy go for it. waste your time, in the mean time im five designs ahead of you and stole your business.
indesign will take quark.
have you seen the beta of quark 6?
how long has it been around compared to indesign. wait till indesign is at version 6.
lol
Originally posted by übergeek
so? one of the most underrated programs ever is ImageReady because nobody knows that it comes with photoshop
I never use Image Ready (even tough i do know it comes with photoshop) what exactly is its purpose (that cant be sone in photoshop), because if its useful i might use it.....