QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Kick back on the couch and discuss all things not directly related to QuarkXPress.
rafikibubu
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 Mar 2013, 15:46

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by rafikibubu » 31 Mar 2013, 07:02

Right on ... excellent points.

And yes, I do often use InDesign (or prefer anyway) for long documents and books. At my last company, I worked every week on long listings (average of 48 newspages, another that was about 100 letter-size pages) of real estate transactions. Now at my current job, we deal with long lists of legal opinions from the courts. So for me, I guess I'm always on the lookout for time-savings, and eliminating the possibly of error. Lots of newspapers and magazines ... and mainly on the editorial end of things, though I do ads too as needed.

I think it's fair comment that with smaller projects, it kind of doesn't matter all that much. Comfort is comfort, and again, tools are tools.

One thing I'll say that I do like about Quark ... well two actually ...

For one, having the ALT key be the shortcut key for moving around the page (hand tool). It's such a simple difference, but it helps when you're working with type. InDesign of course, uses the space bar.

The advantage to the Quark ALT key solution is that if I'm typing in text in one spot, and want to move to another spot, I can simply hold ALT, move as I'd like, and then resume typing. With InDesign, you can't just hit the spacebar as you're typing, since of course, it'll just put i spaces! You have to hit ESC to get out of the text frame, THEN space bar over to where you want to go. Not only does that take more time, you can very easily put in erroneous spaces by mistake.

And I also quite like the keyboard shortcuts by default in Quark for leading and tracking. You can increase/decrease in Quark by tiny increments by holding down an extra key or two (shift? alt? I'm not in front of my mac at the moment). With InDesign, nudging an object around works this way, which is nice. But with text, holding down extra keys for leading or tracking will INCREASE the degree of the change, not the other way around. This forces you to have to go into prefs and change the deault amounts. Quark's, in this regard, ends up being a more simple, and helpful solution.

As to the usage panel in Quark, I never thought about it that way when it comes to fonts. That's nifty. However, I dunno if you know, but I think, as of InDesign 5.5 and up, if you open a package sent by someone, if needed, InDesign will use the font files IN THE PACKAGE, temporarily ... which I have to say, helps to cut down a HUGE hassle that is otherwise the norm.

The usage panel in Quark to me has it's failings with the pictures area, which is handled by the Links palette in InDesign. Many times I like to try and do cutouts with images. With InDesign, I simply duplicate the uncut photo in my layout, and then relink only that picture frame to the new, cut out section. After a long time, I found a similar way to do the same in Quark, but I have to go through many more hoops, since Usage won't let you relink only one instance of a link.

Maybe it's just comfort for me, but in working with ads ... I took the time to set up an ad frame work with InDesign, and ever since then, I definitely much prefer using InDesign for my ads and classifieds. There are a number of GREP find/changes that I use regularly, and keep saved as queries, or jotted down on notes.

Styles are big for me ... and my ad template has two sets of typeface styles sets ... as I call them ... a serif and a sans. Each set has a preset style for body, body bullet, breaker hed, subhed and large hed, and a few others ... and each set has the body copy set as the base for all the rest.

Since I try to change the type faces as much as possible for each ad (I don't want them all the same, and neither do clients), all I have to do is choose a new serif and sans when I start the ad. I change the body serif and body sans as needed, and then I'm off and running. Since body is the basis for all other styles, that one change is all that's needed. And of course down the line, if the client ends up wanting another typeface from what I've chosen, I just change the body style, and the whole ad is instantly fixed and ready to go again.

I'm pretty sure you can do "based on style" with Quark styles too ... I just haven't used it as much in there.

Also again .. with GREP styles (which CS4 supports btw), I have that magic little GREP style defined in my base body styles that automatically eliminates widows. Saves lots of time, since that's built into my template.

I'll look at the "next paragraph" feature a little more, thanks. InDesign has that as well ... though I still would much appreciate if Quark would make "conditional styles" into attributes of the paragraph style. Would make the feature alot more useful. I think "next paragraph" might help, but if you have an answer than's long, and more than one paragraph, it seems to me like you'd have to manually shut off the conditional style.

And no that I think of it ... the "panel happy interface" comment is well stated. Though my solution has been to use two screens at the office, and the primary use for the second for me is to hold all of my most common panels. Expensive solution, but I'm not going back now.The newer versions of InDesign have moved away from that issue a bit, in that the panels are collapsible for when they're not in use. But I'm so used to having them there on the other screen, I avoid the new way. But that might be something you'd enjoy. Also, for style applying with InDesign, look into Quick Apply sometime if you haven't already. Cmd-Return I believe ... it brings up a spotlight box or sorts, start typing the name of the style you want, and it comes right up. If you do it again, it remembers the last one you chose, unless to start a new one. Helps me alot in chosing styles I use infrequently, but still want to access when I need them.Cheers!

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

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by eyoungren » 31 Mar 2013, 10:48

Actually InDesign has the option key for panning too. You just have to be in a text box. It switches automatically when you have the type tool selected. If you are unsure of where you are as far as editing you can also hold down OPTN+Spacebar in ID and be sure you are going to pan and not enter text.
Yeah, ID has an advantage with the links palette. On the other hand it's not navigatable like the usage panel and for the commands to work you have to leave the links panel open. What I have done is made some of the more used panels for myself auto collapsable on my first screen (with the info bar at the bottom). I call them up when I need to use them by keyboard shortcuts similar to XPress. Other panels, such as Color, Stroke, Swatch, Layers, Links, Pages, etc I leave open on my second monitor. I use those less so when I need to move the mouse over to them I lose less time. The panels I mentioned I use shortcuts for on the first screen are the one's I use most. I can use CMD+M to get into the Info bar and I use CTRL+Return to go back to the previous field if I've left it.
CMD+Return for Quick Apply was one of the best features I found. It has eliminated 99% of mouse travel to the style sheet panels for me.
I hear you on ad templates. It's something I've often considered. However, we're a weekly and other than a handful of customers who change their ad copy each week most ads we do are new builds. Font faces rarely change and most new builds don't have customers specifying fonts. We do have templates for our ad sizes (ready made folders with the document at the correct size) though.
Didn't realize you were building ads either. Defintely see the need for styles when it comes to legals.
I'm just glad now that two years in I have finally settled on a workspace/panel layout and keyboard commands that work for me. Not it's not quite like XPress, but I have made it as similar as I can. F13 calls up Find/Font for instance, where OPTN+F13 is the Links panel. That's equivalent to the Font Usage and Picture Usage on XPress. Little stuff like that. Works for me anyway.

rafikibubu
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 Mar 2013, 15:46

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by rafikibubu » 01 Apr 2013, 03:42

Right on .. that's what it's all about in my opinion, getting your programs to work for you, and no one else.

Ohhh and that's AWESOME, the OPTN trick when working in text. Makes all the difference. WOW, thank you on that one.

Yeah, most of our ads are new builds as well ... and clients most don't specify a font face, I just try not to do the same thing for all of them (ROP ads anyways, classifieds I'm less than concerned about it). I like having a framework set up, so that I can get started quicker, and change me mind easier. Just like having all the ad templates made at various sizes, but basically one step further.

But we do occasionally get a pesky client who will out of no where say something like "ughhh I dunno if I like that, I don't know what it is, it's just, hmmm not us". About 9 times out of 10 when that happens, a choose a new color for the ad, and change the typeface, and it's a whole new ball game.

Cheers,
~Nate

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

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by eyoungren » 02 Apr 2013, 06:21

Here's my panel layouts if interested.
Monitor one, my main working monitor (where I edit the documents):
Image Monitor two, my less used but still important panels:
Image There you go, that's the arrangement I settled on. Works for me so far. Panels in the first pic are called via shortcuts (I usually don't click on them, except for the libraries.

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

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by eyoungren » 02 Apr 2013, 08:17

Note, the forum software likes to clip images, so right click on the image and view in a new tab (or window) to see the full image.

BoRhap
Posts: 2
Joined: 08 Apr 2013, 09:21

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by BoRhap » 08 Apr 2013, 04:46

I was looking through this thread, and I hope I can get an honest opinion...
I have not worked in a professional environment since 1997. At that time, I was the only Quark user in our design firm where Pagemaker was the norm. I worked in a company that did everything from marketing to finished print material, all in house. Our pre-press department liked getting large jobs in Quark and I was the one who offered to learn it/do it. Let me also say that this was just the beginning of the digital age...I designed websites and told a programmer how and what I wanted done.
Fast forward to today. I am now working in a small business that can use my graphic design skills. They have a website that is not very creative and would like to be more in control...posting new products, etc. without having to involve their web host for all this.
Here's my question (finally). If I were to invest in software that allows me to create print material, as well as create/update a website on a regular basis, without having to go through a "programmer/web host," is Quark my answer?
Thanks for your help!

gdrake
Quarkian
Quarkian
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Dec 1969, 19:00

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by gdrake » 08 Apr 2013, 06:33

BoRhap wrote:I was looking through this thread, and I hope I can get an honest opinion...
I have not worked in a professional environment since 1997. At that time, I was the only Quark user in our design firm where Pagemaker was the norm. I worked in a company that did everything from marketing to finished print material, all in house. Our pre-press department liked getting large jobs in Quark and I was the one who offered to learn it/do it. Let me also say that this was just the beginning of the digital age...I designed websites and told a programmer how and what I wanted done.
Fast forward to today. I am now working in a small business that can use my graphic design skills. They have a website that is not very creative and would like to be more in control...posting new products, etc. without having to involve their web host for all this.
Here's my question (finally). If I were to invest in software that allows me to create print material, as well as create/update a website on a regular basis, without having to go through a "programmer/web host," is Quark my answer?
Thanks for your help!
Hi BoRhap

While QuarkXPress does have some Web features, it's primary focus is not as a Web design tool. In fact I don't know of any tools that can cover professional print and professional Web at the same time to a high standard. QuarkXPress is a great option for print, eBooks and iPad/iPhone/Android apps but my recommendation would be to treat your Web approach separately, which could even include going down a WordPress route to give you the Web CMS element to what you're doing.

rafikibubu
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 Mar 2013, 15:46

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by rafikibubu » 08 Apr 2013, 07:01

eyoungren wrote:Note, the forum software likes to clip images, so right click on the image and view in a new tab (or window) to see the full image.
Looks quite efficient, thanks for sharing!Cheers,~Nate

rafikibubu
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 Mar 2013, 15:46

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by rafikibubu » 08 Apr 2013, 07:37

BoRhap wrote:I was looking through this thread, and I hope I can get an honest opinion...
I have not worked in a professional environment since 1997. At that time, I was the only Quark user in our design firm where Pagemaker was the norm. I worked in a company that did everything from marketing to finished print material, all in house. Our pre-press department liked getting large jobs in Quark and I was the one who offered to learn it/do it. Let me also say that this was just the beginning of the digital age...I designed websites and told a programmer how and what I wanted done.
Fast forward to today. I am now working in a small business that can use my graphic design skills. They have a website that is not very creative and would like to be more in control...posting new products, etc. without having to involve their web host for all this.
Here's my question (finally). If I were to invest in software that allows me to create print material, as well as create/update a website on a regular basis, without having to go through a "programmer/web host," is Quark my answer?
Thanks for your help!


I agree with gdrake. Quark and InDesign are both designed for and best used as print design programs. They can also accomodate interactive elements, good for web ads, multimedia presentations, etc. And both do have functions for exporting HTML, but the code and results from this are far from ideal.

However, I often use these programs to design comps of how I want a website to look, and then code it later after the concept is finished.

As stated, WordPress would probably be one of the best things for you to investigate, especially considering your comment "would like to be more in control...posting new products, etc. without having to involve their web host for all this."

With a WordPress site set up, anyone at your company should be able to login and make changes, or post new items. As the designer, you can create and modify custom visual themes. It does take a little learning, but it's much easier than coding a site from scratch, and it can eliminate the need to bring a developer into the mix. Lynda.com has some great tutorials on this.

Alternatively, you might think about looking into something called Freeway ... supposedly it's a layout program that's designed for web layout. http://www.softpress.com/freeway-pro/

I haven't used it myself, but it sounds intriguing. There's also Muse from Adobe ... and that looks somewhat impressive to me, though I like coding the site myself, and letting WordPress do alot of the work. http://www.adobe.com/products/muse.html

The really great thing about WordPress is:

a) Your company can really have anyone update the website, instead of forcing production to make all and every adjustment by handb) If you want to redesign the site down the line, you can simply change or redesign the theme, leaving all the content in place.

So use Quark or InDesign to plan the look of your website and/or for your print collateral. But then, do the nuts and bolts work elsewhere.

Cheers,
~Nate

BoRhap
Posts: 2
Joined: 08 Apr 2013, 09:21

QuarkXpress vs InDesign

Post by BoRhap » 09 Apr 2013, 04:26

Thanks for the advise. You all have been a great help.

Post Reply

Return to “Sofa Threads”