InDesign CS Removes All Doubt

Multi-inking, Yes! Now I just wish it was not such a memory hog. Time for a new machine? I hope not.

InDesign will soon take over.

it took over my machine awhile ago.

Yeah ID is awesome, except for the fact that none of the printers we use will take an ID file without cursing and bitching. I've been trying to get it into the workflow here at my agency, but I've almost given up because of the intensity of the battle.

It does incredbile things, but if I can't get anyone to print it, well....

I hear your complaint a lot, Walkman. While I've rarely had a problem with output, it seems to be a common refrain. Perhaps the only step between Adobe and page layout domination is a serious InDesign education and training campaign for printers and service bureaux.

Use a printer who does PDF workflow. Indesign creates cleaner, more printable and better-behaved PDFs than anything else out of the box. I'm in the design department of a publishing/printing office, and we do direct to plate from indesign, as well as traditional offset litho and several digital outputs - some direct to the machine, some through a rip - without major problems. From time to time the print dialogue in Indesign requires some counterintuitive settings and a little monkeying around, but that's the worst problem we've had. And it's all overcome easily by either PDF or PS output and then rasterizing the file on the RIP itself.

The biggest hurdle I'm having is dealing with old RIPs and old thinking. The handful of printers my agency uses don't want to upgrade their equipment/RIPs and the powers-that-be on my side of the fence don't want ruffled feathers by putting a foot down to the suppliers. It's ugly-to be sure. Apparently, I'm the only one in the country using ID, if you were to talk with my printers. Definitely not enough demand for them to drop large amounts of cash.

The local MAC tech shop had a big Quark vs. InDesign seminar here a few months back. But while the creatives were excited about the prospects, the presentation was flat and the speakers seemed unprepared.

You're absolutely correct that Adobe needs to do a better job of education.

So, I'm doing what I can but I've had to turn back to Quark for the bigger jobs. It sucks, but I guess I'll have to wait longer.

Yeah ID is awesome, except for the fact that none of the printers we use will take an ID file without cursing and bitching.

Heh, I've been in this long enough to remember my service bureau complaining about Quark files (back when people still called it "XPress"). They prefered PageMaker files and had to restart the RIP every time somebody ran a Quark file. It was a big headache for them. Oh, the irony of it.

I switched to ID about a year ago. Initially, I ran into a lot of resistance from my printers. One went so far as to say "Don't use that program." My response was "I will not be using QuarkXPress again. So if you want my business, you better get up to speed in ID quick." They did.

I really believe things are turning the corner for ID lately. Only occasionally do I run into a printer or bureau that is not InDesign friendly. In which case, EPS or PDF files always stop their bitching.

When the new Adobe try out apps will be available?

There are an awful lot of printers out there still running their PostScript Level One RIPS, and they are gonna milk them till the end of time.

Slowly but surely ID will come out ahead.

I've been using it for two years, send pdfs all over the place and never have an output problem.

I usually go to printers that take PDF. I switched to Indy about a year ago but haven't found a printer that takes native Indy files. In the past year I haven't had any trouble just using PDF files, sometimes as seps if they need it that way. I have way more trouble submitting magazine ads for some reason.

It isn't education or anything that the printers need. They don't upgrade because they're in a commodity business: margins are low. All the dickering we do with getting the lowest priced print job drives them to compete on cost and delivery speed and the service tends to get lax. I have strong relationships with most of my printers and that solves many of my problems.

If your printer won't play ball with you, find someone else you can trust and work with. And don't forget that those guys are breathing ink fumes and not getting rich. Work with them. Hold your ground on your apps of choice, but see what middle ground you can get to.

I agree with Gahlord, and even more, remember that the service bureaus don't use layout software intensively the way designers do. They are simply called upon to output files. The average designer isn't always as scrupulous about file prep as is necessary for perfect output. If jobs have to be re-run, designers squawk when the cost of that falls on them, but why should output houses and printers eat it when their margins are so low? Paper is expensive, and so are film and typesetting equipment. Now that PDF is mature and stable enough for output, take advantage of it. This is exactly what it's good for. I'm sure the bureaus love it. It gets designers to take on the responsibility for making printable files. Forget fighting about QX vs. ID.

I was recently at the Apple "Driven by Design" drool-fest in Vancouver. InDesign3 rocks, and justs keeps on getting better. They're even incorporating old PM5 features! The Quark jockey was pathetic and so was the demo, with the whole dance focussing on "layout spaces". To quote GX magazine.. "Quark 6 is the last upgrade".

For those whose printing vendors are complaining: Remember--YOU are the printer's CUSTOMER! If you go into a shoe store to buy some Nikes and the shoe store you went into doesn't carry Nike, you don't buy Addidas; you go to the store down the street that DOES carry Nike. I have kept my printing vendors informed on what type of files I will be sending. On the day that I ordered the CS upgrade, I called my printers and told them that I was ordering CS and to expect files in that format in the near future. If they don't want to provide me with the service I want, the next shop down the street will be happy to have my business. I do not let my printers dictate to me what I can and cannot do. I inform them what they need to do to keep my business. And they love me for it!

That's what they say to your face. Behind your back they're talking smack.

I hate Quark 5, and Quark 6 doesn't seem to be much better. Quark is just band-aiding this product to the point where it's becoming overbloated. I recently purchased InDesign 2 and it's been great! I agree that if your printer bitches...find a new one. I'm only loyal to people with customer service skills.

I agree that InDesign rocks, but Adobe's support for it sucks. I have one PostScript 2 printer and one PostScript 3 printer in house. Though I have managed to find printers who can deal with InDesign files, Adobe has not managed to return one email regarding InDesign's incompatibility with PostScript printers. Every time I have attempted to print to either of my in-house printers, InDesign locks up my system. (None of my other applications do this.) Most of the time, exporting a PDF file produces good results, but sometimes even that locks the system. The fact that I have to export to PDF to simply view my InDesign work in printed form is ridiculous. I have just bought the CS upgrade, and I'm eager to see if Adobe has figured out how to make PostScript and InDesign to like each other, but I am not getting my hopes up.

Kelly - Give the Adobe User Forums a go. The friendly folks there have helped rescue me from my few InDesign woes.

Thanks Stephen. I just gave that a shot. I'll keep my fingers crossed (except whilst typing!)

Added link to David Blatner’s column to entry.

Hey guys lay off printers! We are a digital print bureau ( DISCUS Digital Print ) in Perth Western Australia and it's not always our fault. ID1 was impossible to print from and we could not, in fairness to you our clients, support it. ID2 was much improved but was still difficult to supply high quality, correct and consistant work. IDCS is like a completly new program, running well on Macs and PCs. Many of our agenceys have/are changing over and we support and even recommend it.

I'm stubborn, but not silenced. I still prefer Quark 4 in OS9, with ATM Deluxe and Type Reunion. And an older Wacom tablet/stylus which I prefer to their latest.

Also, I do freelance design work for several book publishers who use Quark 4.

I use InD in OS X for a few things, like making PDFs of Quark files, and with some fonts that have OpenType features.

I guess the biggest reason is that I go ballistic trying to reprogram myself (all those keyboard shortcuts that have become second nature). That's why I'm still using Photoshop 5 and illustrator 6, as well, even though I have acquired the "upgrades". As a generalist, I use a little bit of a lot of software, and it's just so much effort to keep relearning software to do basically the same tasks.

However, realistically, I know that I will have to move to CS soon, or become a cranky old pariah who no one wants to do business with. There is a great pressure that larger corporations who always have the latest upgrades put upon smaller suppliers. They get really pissed off when you ask them to "save down" a file and send it to you again, because you don't have their version and can't open it.

from a geek/tech perspective I can see why people prefer ID. In the PC dominated corporate world where you need to "stay in line" its ideal the bean counters love it. In the creative Mac world is painfully obvious that ID was put together by geeks not designers/artists. I heard the hype and finally took the plunge and was amazed at how lacking in fundamentals and usability. Reminds me of MS Word, cumbersome and pedestrian. The geeks that developed it add a lot of bells and whistles, but like geeks often do, they let the tail wag the dog.

I too love InDesign. But not all publications go out to be printed. Because I work in education, many of my publications are in-house booklet format.

When InBooklet sold out to Quark ID users were left with IDs substitute program. I find that this does not align evenly and prints margins to one side.

I find it reprehensible that a publication package should regard the booklet form as an 'extra'. Even Microsoft's Publisher has had a very accurate, and easy to use booklet option from the beginning.

I have to take my CS2 into CS to print the booklet on the original InBooklet. An extra nuisance. But what happens when I upgrade to CS3? What will happen then?