Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Kick back on the couch and discuss all things not directly related to QuarkXPress.
chocolatito_1
Posts: 23
Joined: 11 Apr 2008, 14:36

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by chocolatito_1 » 25 Jun 2013, 06:38

I have been wanting to upgrade my old version of Quark Xpress but I keep hearing that less and less designers use Quark. The other day for the first time a printer told me they did not have Quark installed, therefore they could not take my job? what?
I know most ad agencies are sticking with InDesign mainly because it comes with the suite and they do not want to purchase Quark additionally. I do often get files from other designers that are in InDesign. I personally do not like InDesign and rarely use it but I am wondering if more designers are switching now that the creative cloud allows you to use the latest versions without actually purchasing the software?
What are your thoughts? How much longer do you think designers will keep using Quark? Do you use both equally or do you still prefer Quark?
Looking for reasons to purchase new Quark version versus just start using InDesign more.

rcantin
Posts: 442
Joined: 13 Sep 2006, 08:12

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by rcantin » 25 Jun 2013, 06:59

chocolatito_1 wrote:printer told me they did not have Quark installed, therefore they could not take my job?
You still can send them PDF from QuarkXPress. They'll be happy to take it ...

User avatar
eyoungren
Posts: 3259
Joined: 27 May 2004, 16:08
Location: Phoenix, AZ USA
Contact:

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by eyoungren » 25 Jun 2013, 07:51

I made the switch a little over three years ago. I did it because I wanted to learn the program, but I never would have learned it on my own so by doing it at work I essentially got "paid training." I'm the Composing Manager and before that it was still my area so I could do that. My boss doesn't care about that stuff as long as the work gets out.
We went to CS4. Right now, I'm just waiting for my coworker to get her G4 upgraded to a Mac Pro and we'll be off to CS6 and then the new online stuff.
I still do not love ID. I've learned to like it and appreciate some of the things it can do, but I prefer XPress and on my own that is what I use. I did not switch because I wanted to, but because I wanted to improve my skill set.
That said, sometimes I have to shake my head. XPress has gotten better over the years and I know a lot of hardworking customer driven engineers and employees that are great people. But it took Quark until version 6.x to include the ability to natively embed fonts. Drop shadows did not occur until version 7.x.
Then. With version 8.x we got the new Roger Rabbit GUI and certain things dissappeared. Some have been fixed, some not. I can't speak to version 9.x because I have not been able to use it until just recently (and we're on ID now). However, I think Quark STILL has not brough the ability to stroke editable text. You still have to do Text to Box in order to do that. Which of course, makes it uneditable.
I'm hoping that XPress 10 fixes that, but we'll see. XPress can't do feathered images as well (correct me if I am wrong). That's something I now do commonly. I love XPress, so I have a ton of hope for 10.0.

User avatar
omegaman
Posts: 489
Joined: 08 Jun 2012, 20:22
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Contact:

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by omegaman » 25 Jun 2013, 09:19

This is such a dead issue. Find a printer that will take a PDF. Printers still requiring the document, images and fonts are waiting your time. I switched to Indesign years ago, but have begun using Quark again and have no problems with any of the printers who accept PDF. Revise your workflow to suit what's best for you not the damn printer.

chocolatito_1
Posts: 23
Joined: 11 Apr 2008, 14:36

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by chocolatito_1 » 25 Jun 2013, 09:32

Thanks for your answer. I know all printers take PDFs but for large multi-page documents I still prefer to send the quark file so they can impose the pages of my file properly.
I guess I did not post my question correctly. I don't want to base the decision of updating my version of quark based on the printer, I was looking for designer preferences. All the blogs I have read, designers do not want to use quark anymore and prefer Indesign. So I came to the quark forum to see if more designers here are still using quark A LOT more than Indesign.

User avatar
MikeWenzloff
Posts: 344
Joined: 05 Jun 2013, 12:55

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by MikeWenzloff » 25 Jun 2013, 11:22

Imposing a PDF is what every printer I have worked with since PDFs have wanted. That too is a dead issue.As to the ID versus QXP thing...I use a wide variety of applications to do my work. Generally I only use ID when that is what a client expects in return. Else I use QXP or any other application. ID has long-standing issues just like anything else. I wish each software vendor spent more of their time fixing issues than rolling in so-called new features.Like the old saying, it isn't the tools, its the craftsman.Mike

jml
Posts: 7
Joined: 20 Apr 2009, 07:43

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by jml » 26 Jun 2013, 04:47

Hello,I'm used to send PDF/X-1a:2001 files (1 per page) to printers for large multi-pages documents - I export with Xpress 9 to .ps file and then make the pdf with acrobat distiller (MagazineAds_1v4 joboptions). I export "separate pages" (in Xpress export options) to a control folder of Acrobat Distiller to automatise the process.Last winter I have sent 384 pages in 16 differents language versions (black change) then it's about 6000 pdf files, to print a catalogue (on a big rotative printer). That doesn't cause any problem to the printer. No problem with missing font or picture, small files (the folder for all the files is 1,4 Go) and easy to treat and impose by the printer prepress service.An other advantage of working like that is that the adobe distiller and eventually, Enfocus Pitstop can check the files before sending them.I prefer working with Xpress for big jobs because the files are less heavy than with InDesign and Xpress does the job securely.

rcantin
Posts: 442
Joined: 13 Sep 2006, 08:12

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by rcantin » 26 Jun 2013, 06:15

chocolatito_1 wrote:The other day for the first time a printer told me they did not have Quark installed, therefore they could not take my job? what?
The next thing you'll hear is a printer telling you that he don't have a subscription for Adobe creative cloud and he cant take anything but PDF...

Ira
Posts: 287
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 09:19

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by Ira » 02 Jul 2013, 00:24

omegaman wrote:This is such a dead issue. Find a printer that will take a PDF. Printers still requiring the document, images and fonts are waiting your time. I switched to Indesign years ago, but have begun using Quark again and have no problems with any of the printers who accept PDF. Revise your workflow to suit what's best for you not the damn printer.

Some people still use a workflow where printers actually check their clients stuff before printing proofs. And AFTER printing proofs. And how many times does a client send a PDF file to the printer, and has to resend it after seeing a mistake or two on the proof? A mistake the printer can't correct on a PDF?

But could easily make if they had the native file?
And let's not forget the printer who knows his proper rip, but has to take any PDF regardless how it was Distilled and just prints the damn thing.

PDFs are WONDERFUL, but to claim that supplying native files is a dead issue--I can never agree with that based on the workflow necessary for many of the projects I've worked on in the past.

Ira
Posts: 287
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 09:19

Quark Xpress not used that much anymore?

Post by Ira » 02 Jul 2013, 00:29

jml wrote:Hello,I'm used to send PDF/X-1a:2001 files (1 per page) to printers for large multi-pages documents - I export with Xpress 9 to .ps file and then make the pdf with acrobat distiller (MagazineAds_1v4 joboptions). I export "separate pages" (in Xpress export options) to a control folder of Acrobat Distiller to automatise the process.Last winter I have sent 384 pages in 16 differents language versions (black change) then it's about 6000 pdf files, to print a catalogue (on a big rotative printer). That doesn't cause any problem to the printer. No problem with missing font or picture, small files (the folder for all the files is 1,4 Go) and easy to treat and impose by the printer prepress service.An other advantage of working like that is that the adobe distiller and eventually, Enfocus Pitstop can check the files before sending them.I prefer working with Xpress for big jobs because the files are less heavy than with InDesign and Xpress does the job securely.


And what do you have to do if the printer spots a major typo in a headline?

You have to do that all over again.

Post Reply

Return to “Sofa Threads”