QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Discuss functionality of QuarkXPress 2018.
QuarkXPress 2018 will be released on May 16, 2018.

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby Kal » 15 Apr 2018, 01:07

Ah, there is now an 'Upload attachment' tab! Thanks.

As I said before, I tried to replicate the demo in InDesign CS6, to see what InDesign would do with those paragraphs in each language. I set up a new document and used InDesign's default settings, but just changed the 'after first' hyphenation setting to '2 letters' to try and match what QuarkXPress seems to be doing in the video. That's as fair a comparison as I could do (while recognising that there are still some unknown variables).

So here are the screenshots:

QuarkXPress
QuarkXPress-screenshot.png
QuarkXPress-screenshot.png (193.92 KiB) Viewed 238 times


InDesign
InDesign-screenshot.png
InDesign-screenshot.png (132.81 KiB) Viewed 238 times


Both could clearly use some tweaking, but less-so in InDesign. (Interestingly, InDesign uses more hyphens in the English example, but less in the German. That was unexpected!) The most obvious difference though, is the word spacing. InDesign clearly wins the round there.

I'm not making this comparison to gloat or anything like that. Really, I want to like QuarkXPress because I'm fed up with Adobe. I just don't think I can if it means I'm going to be manually tweaking paragraphs line-by-line. I'd love it if QuarkXPress had the equivalent of InDesign's multi-line Paragraph Composer. Consider it a feature request. :-)
Kal
 
Posts: 8
Joined: 19 Mar 2018, 20:53

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby MikeWenzloff » 15 Apr 2018, 08:08

It would be nice to upload both the Q and idml versions. You can zip them and if small enough upload them in the same manner. If too large for the forum, you would need to upload to dropbox or the like and provide a download link.
MikeWenzloff
 
Posts: 1230
Joined: 05 Jun 2013, 12:55

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby MikeWenzloff » 15 Apr 2018, 12:00

OK. So I scanned and OCR'd. Tried to manually correct some characters and I likely missed some. I'll blame it on being up most of the night :lol:

I imported some of my standard H&Js from previous book work. The files have three paragraph styles, one for each language. Each language has slightly different settings, but they match in both IQ & ID. While it is not possible for Q to use optical metrics, that is what is being used in ID (but with or without optical metrics, the results were comparable). I also tried to use glyph scaling in ID with as little as 1% one and both directions, but it made some of the lines too tight or loose. I am using the Paragraph Composer in ID. Text is 11 pt.

Using these automated settings, there are lines I dislike in both. Even with adjusting the style in ID to hopefully rid/even out some of those lines, it made some lines worse than they were. At some point in playing, I just give up.

The screen shots are made from taking a screen shot in one application and pasting into the other, then adjusting the image frame to reveal each language. I'll likely comment on them later. Maybe. But for now I've used up my play time for a Sunday. I gotta take a hike around town. My sanity break!

1-English.png
1-English.png (78.76 KiB) Viewed 215 times


1-German.png
1-German.png (92.76 KiB) Viewed 215 times


1-French.png
1-French.png (85.36 KiB) Viewed 215 times


Mike
MikeWenzloff
 
Posts: 1230
Joined: 05 Jun 2013, 12:55

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby MikeWenzloff » 15 Apr 2018, 12:19

Oops. Before I leave I wanted to say that even in a short novel, magazine articles, etc., I have not ever been able to not copy-edit for balanced lines or manually make some adjustments in tracking in order to push/pull lines to please me.

So the above comparisons are really kind of fake ones. For books, breaking across pages, opening chapters, et al may need manual treatment. With magazines, it is a different type of copy-fit challenge but the same techniques are used and what has mattered more to me than one article being perfect is the page balance as a whole.

Both applications are different. But unless one consistently picks either the left or right examples as being overall better than the other, one needs to recognize that good typesetting can be done in both but they may/do have slightly different results...and the settings in each that have corresponding equals in the other application are really are not exactly comparable.
MikeWenzloff
 
Posts: 1230
Joined: 05 Jun 2013, 12:55

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby Matthias Guenther (Quark) » 16 Apr 2018, 02:01

Hi Kal,

can you share your H&J settings please? There is a lot you can adjust.

Thanks
Matthias
Feel there should be more chatting, more tips, more user interaction?
Join us on Facebook, a forum-like group with over 2,000 QuarkXPress fans interacting:
http://www.facebook.com/groups/quarkxpress



Image
User avatar
Matthias Guenther (Quark)
Quarkian
Quarkian
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 15:06
Location: http://bit.ly/QuarkHamburg

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby Kal » 17 Apr 2018, 05:27

Hey Mike, I just searched for the text on the web and found it on this page! http://www.quark.com/About_Quark/Company_Profile/ I changed the language for each version, copy and pasted. I certainly didn't type out all that German myself! :)

Cheers for going to the trouble. I have to admit, your examples are of comparable quality, and both pretty decent actually (given the narrow columns!) If you didn't do too much fiddling in QuarkXPress, I could be convinced to give it a try on that evidence. (The thing I'm really trying to avoid is fiddling!)

My first effort was with no customisation or tweaking at all, because I was trying to give as fair and honest a comparison as I could (given that there was no tweaking done in the video).

IDML file attached if you (or anyone else) still wants to have a go themselves. The first page is my original, the second uses customised (better) H&J settings, and the third uses the single-line composer for comparison (pretty good spacing, but more hyphens overall).
Attachments
InDesign vs QuarkXPress 2018.idml.zip
(49.99 KiB) Downloaded 7 times
Kal
 
Posts: 8
Joined: 19 Mar 2018, 20:53

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby Kal » 17 Apr 2018, 05:31

Matthias, as I mentioned before, I used InDesign's default settings, but just changed the 'after first' hyphenation setting to '2 letters'. These hyphenation settings are:

Word spacing: 80%, 100%, 133%
Letter spacing: 0%, 0%, 0%
Glyph scaling: 100%, 100%, 100%

In actual production, I would never use these out-of-the-box settings for justified text. I would create a default paragraph style with customised H&J settings, and then have two or three variations for various tweaks: better spacing, less hyphens, tighter spacing, etc. Then typesetting mostly involves applying one of these styles if my default one isn't ideal, and sometimes forcing a troublesome word to break in a different place (InDesign insists on hyphenating compound words which is one frustration I have to deal with manually) or keeping certain words together.

My default style might look something like this:

Word spacing: 90%, 100%, 115%
Letter spacing: -4%, 0%, 2%
Glyph scaling: 99%, 100%, 101%

Applying those settings to the previous document results in a better result:

InDesign-screenshot-better.png
InDesign-screenshot-better.png (131.99 KiB) Viewed 109 times


(Well, a mostly better result. I don't like the single word on the last line of those non-English examples.)
Kal
 
Posts: 8
Joined: 19 Mar 2018, 20:53

Re: QuarkXPress vs Adobe Paragraph Composer

Postby MikeWenzloff » 17 Apr 2018, 08:54

Thanks for the IDML.

It was a weekend...so no trouble at all! Playing in various applications is part of what I do on a weekend. It's better than TV...

Kal wrote:...
Cheers for going to the trouble. I have to admit, your examples are of comparable quality, and both pretty decent actually (given the narrow columns!) If you didn't do too much fiddling in QuarkXPress, I could be convinced to give it a try on that evidence. (The thing I'm really trying to avoid is fiddling!)
...

I both opened your IDML in CS6 and created a new project in 2018 by opening your IDML. Other than glyph scaling, your H&J settings are brought into Q and are available...

capture-001842.png
capture-001842.png (24.21 KiB) Viewed 83 times


Now, without the +-1% glyph scaling, they are not 100% intact, but they do come in and are attached to the paragraph styles which used them. Also note the H&Js named English, German & French. QXP has always had the ability to import (Append) most ever aspect of another Q file. So I imported those ones from my test file. It's pretty handy fr the recycling of favorite settings/attributes not limited to just H&J settings.

I use this Append of such styles such as H&Js is simply that. I have several of such things that I reuse in various documents time and again. Which cuts down on the being fiddly aspect.

I think a point to all this would be that ID & Q are simply different from each other but overlap and are similar in oh so many ways. One of the hardest thing for QXP designers in making the switch to ID was to stop "thinking QuarkXPress." Whole books were written about making that switch. It is advice I read on the ID forum from time to time to this day.

If you make the switch, I would encourage you to join the Facebook Closed Group. Questions are generally answered in all but a minute by someone. Some use both applications (like I do) or have simply cut the Adobe cord altogether making Q their layout application of choice. For some, they made the switch after watching for a couple years and seeing the aggressive cycle Quark has been doing for the past several versions. That aggressiveness has applied to bug fixing, feature enhancement and new features.

Anyway, about time for more coffee!

Thanks for humoring me. I can get a bit wordy.

Take care, Mike
MikeWenzloff
 
Posts: 1230
Joined: 05 Jun 2013, 12:55

Previous

Return to QuarkXPress 2018: Preview

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron