Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at [email protected] and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

adobe indesign vs. quark...

Discussion in 'Art & Design' started by Dusty Lipschitz, Apr 26, 2005.

  1. im looking to do magazine layout.
    i know qusrk is the industry standard, but people also are starting to lean towards indesign, and say it is more flexible and user friendly.
    any thoughts or expereince?
     
  2. SPORTO

    SPORTO Senior Member

    Joined: Jan 6, 2005 Messages: 1,086 Likes Received: 10
    I have been working in the magazine biz
    for some years now.
    Although Quark is the industry
    standard, and it is what i know, it is now
    a arcahic piece of shit. I despise the program.

    What adobe has managed to do is have all
    its CS programs creative suite work in harmony, & when
    your spending time moving from vector graphics,
    to layout, to images, that helps.

    Quark also took an age to release an
    OSX friendly version of its software,
    & even now its still full of bugs.

    I wont go on, I'm sure other more
    experinced designers will give
    you similar advice.
     
  3. cornpone

    cornpone Member

    Joined: Dec 5, 2003 Messages: 306 Likes Received: 9
    I'm a graphic designer and have worked both with quark and indesign. InDesign is a far better developed program, epecially if you already work with other adobe products. It has much better usabilty between the sofware and has the same key stroke shortcuts as other adobe products. If you are doing magizine layout and are currently using quark you really should take the time to make the switch to indesign, it is worth the time it takes to train yourself, but if you already know quark and adobe illustrator you basically know indesign...
     
  4. Manifesto

    Manifesto Junior Member

    Joined: Sep 1, 2003 Messages: 227 Likes Received: 0
    ive used quark here and there,
    and ive been "raised" in my collegiate career to use indesign.
    it is by far superior.
     
  5. porque

    porque Senior Member

    Joined: May 5, 2002 Messages: 1,844 Likes Received: 0
    ...any body else hear this...adobe is planning on buying out macromedia...it was on an AP bulletin i read the other day...
     
  6. dead

    dead Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 29, 2005 Messages: 175 Likes Received: 1
    Hopefully so, Adobe is whats up. Macromedia is alright, but their web design products are a bit of a bitch. I'm just looking for something that makes web easier. I'm familiar with Adobe so the buy out will be cool with me. I guess its all in how you look at it and what you are versed in.
     
  7. IzacFour

    IzacFour New Jack

    Joined: Oct 10, 2004 Messages: 84 Likes Received: 0
    It is easier to use. Adobe interface/menus are nice and familiar.
     
  8. colt45oe800

    colt45oe800 Member

    Joined: Feb 15, 2002 Messages: 828 Likes Received: 0
    Adobe did buy Macromedia for 3.5 Billion, Software is still going to be based
    off of what Macromedia has created. Only thing that will change is Adobe is
    going to slap there name on it and make it look slightly familar to Adobe
    programs that you use. But if you don't understand how to use Flash or Dreamweaver,
    The fact that Adobe is buying them will not make it easier. As Far as Indesign
    and Quark, I use mostly Quark because thats the program my work has
    invested in. I used InDesign twice in its early 1.x stages and it seemed ok
    My question to InDesign users is about how the type works? In Illustrator
    When you kern type it takes around 25 to see anything Noticeable where
    as Quark the most you need in body copy is +/- 3-5. So My question is
    Are Type adjustments more like Quark or more Like Illustrator? If its like
    Quark. then i think the future is Indesign since it can work flawlessly with
    AI, and PS.
     
  9. WATS_WON

    WATS_WON New Jack

    Joined: Apr 12, 2005 Messages: 3 Likes Received: 0
    I've used both and I gotta go with Indesign too. Quark seems like they really fcuked up a couple of years ago with the OSX thing...the fact that they refused to do a compatable version for mac unless mac agreed to a,b, & c seems lame, and they're paying for that now (& I roll with XP). Also, since the other Adobe products are already what everyone's using for everything else, Indesigns a whole lot more fluid to use with those. And that'll get better and better with time.
    @Colt: InDesign's Kerning is simple...like PS. It's in increments of 10, but as far as work flow...it's nice.
     
  10. Al Green

    Al Green Veteran Member

    Joined: Mar 24, 2001 Messages: 8,561 Likes Received: 1
    Depending on what im working on i have to move back and forth between both Indesign and Quark. I honestly hate quark for a alot of the same reasons as everyone else. On top of that though.. I think its important to know how to use quark..because it will prove useful in alot of office environments. it will eventually become less used since more design schools can only afford to license Adobe Packages since Quark licenses are so damn expensive. In the meantime its going to take Indesign a few iterations before they nail out alot of kinks. because of the cross compatibility btwn adobe software theres lots of glitches to be worked out. occassionally i get a chain of corrupt files due to embedded fonts in a placed EPS or Illustrator file. sometimes this can corrupt a whole packaged file and i only realize it months later when i open it up.

    Its only a matter of time.

    Im hoping that with this whole absorbtion of macromedia into the adobe product line we will see some of the actual good mechanical functions of freehand be brought into Illustrator. Freehand has always been a bit more precise then Illustrator even down to not rounding decimal equivalents like illustrator does.
     
  11. Al Green

    Al Green Veteran Member

    Joined: Mar 24, 2001 Messages: 8,561 Likes Received: 1
    BTW..when it comes to actually seeing the kerning.. that can also be due to how closely you are scaled to the document. sometimes you dont see a change because you are too far away. the same way that type sometimes looks like complete horseshit when you are at 35%
     
  12. colt45oe800

    colt45oe800 Member

    Joined: Feb 15, 2002 Messages: 828 Likes Received: 0
    Whats up Al? What i meant by the kerning question is Quark's 3 letter spaces actually equals about 3 letter spaces.
    (I'll have to use PS and AI for comparisons since i haven't used ID for 2 years.) where in AI and PS if you want to
    kern it out 3 letter spaces you have to put in a number of 20 or 30. Quark even though most of its abilities are archaic,
    like you mentioned the one thing it still has going for itself is the fact is that it is so precise with measurements.
    So how does InDesign match up in the area of precise measurements?

    *edit- had a bad line break. in a quark/ID thread no way.
     
  13. Manifesto

    Manifesto Junior Member

    Joined: Sep 1, 2003 Messages: 227 Likes Received: 0

    haha nerd,.
     
  14. kidlugz

    kidlugz Guest

    my favourite part about indesign is the ability to change the resolution of placed images in your document. manipulating type/shapes/lines/etc over images in quark was always so vague.

    oh. layers too. i know newer versions of quark have layers but i'm still on quark 4 at work. sifting through a page with the arrange command can drive a man crazy.

    i'll second what al green said earlier about learning quark though. indesign won't be 'standard' for at least 5 more years, maybe more. most shops still run quark--meaning, employers expect you to know it.

    the macrodobia empire is sure to produce some sick software. i'm hoping they re-introduce the basic scripting pane back into flash for all of us non-programmer types. it's a wonder adobe hasn't been brought up on some anti-trust charges though. if this isn't a monopoly i don't know what is.
     
  15. porque

    porque Senior Member

    Joined: May 5, 2002 Messages: 1,844 Likes Received: 0
    ...i have wondered about the anti-trust ramifications myself...time will tell...all major mergers have to be aproved before they become legit anyway...but either way you look at it, both companies have monopolies on their individual markets anyway, as you guys are arguing, quark is the standard, everybody uses it, the same with illustrator and photoshop...combining all these into one integrated system could be used to take advantage of companies that need to use it, but it could also yield some great new programs...
     
Top