software wars
Quark vs. Indesign....GO!!
(personally i started out with quark, and i thought it was pretty easy to learn. when i tried to learn indesign i found it difficult. i know that people say indesign is the best because it's got so many cool features, what do you think?)
posted by damonshuck @ 10:43 PM
10 Comments:
Of course, as to how these programs deal with typography, specifically... (Lest we forget our focus.)
Personally, I think it all has to do with what you are ultimately comfortable with. I learned quark first and then indesign but I have no problem with either. Indesign has a few more tools which has allowed me to work with text an images more efficiently, however, quark is capable it just would have taken me more time. Given that both programs are ultimately publication and layout programs, they deal a lot with typography and design. Without them, it would be a world full of nasty type in photoshop files. I think InDesign is better if picking between the two because I have worked with it more with large volumes of type but that isn't to say that quark doesn't have its advantages too.
Honestly, I haven't used Quark since Graphics Studio 1.. so that would be three years. I decided to do a refresher course just now and I opened a Quark document to attempt typing something. I don't really remember anything, I could barely make a text box. I learned all of these foreign terms such as kerning, tracking, preflight, text wrap and export in InDesign so I associate the icons (if there are ones) with the action. Going into Quark was like walking through a grocery store where everything was written in Japanese.
the first page layout program that I used is pagemaker 5. (thanks dad!) Now I am a fan of InDesign. Probably just cause it's what I use at work and in class. When I attempt to use Quark I struggle more. I can better manage my typography in Indd. I definately try not to use photoshop or illustrator for type. The only case I might do this is when manipulating the shape of a letter to create a form.
I agree that is all about what you learned on first. I started on Quark but have used more InDesign. Typographically they are on the same plane. It's best to know both and be capable of using either, no matter what you prefer.
to be honest, i can't remember. i used quark (in gdi) briefly. the following classes used indesign. i was glad, quark was clunky, or felt so to me. but i don't like how you can't just grab type and stretch it. or can you and i just don't know how?
I too haven’t used Quark in a very long time, probably first year at Kendall. So I don’t have much for comparisons. I enjoy Indesign and feel that I know the program pretty well in relation to setting type and understanding what can and can’t be done with typography. I doubt Ill ever try to understand Quark to that degree. So……In Design is my personal preference.
I prefer InDesign and find it easier to do what I want to typographically. But I also think that it's important to know Quark. Kendall might not use it very much any more, but alot of shops still do.
I hate to do it, but I seem to fall right in line with the vast majority, I haven't used Quark in a while. However, I did just use InDesign, which offers you many different tools for manipulating type. Because of its similarity to illustrator, I find that I am able to just figure things out rather than having no idea of what to do.
I would have to say that I am much more comfortable with InDesign, but that doesn't mean that I don't try some things in Quark just to refresh my memory. I think it's important to make sure that we are comfortable with a variety of programs for our future careers.
Post a Comment
<< Home