Well /gd/, though I practically live in Illustrator I'm currently forced to play with Indesign for making magazine, something I have zero experience with.
Could you guys please hook me up with some top tier theory on the subject? I'd even settle for just a template..
just b yourself :D
Indesign is kinda like a castrated Illustrator + downgraded microsoft word. Since you know Illustrator you should know how to use the interface and toold. You will probably feel very limited and most of the times you will search for functions and options and it is not there(and it really is not there, so stop looking and start up Illustrator and import your illustrator files into Indesign) But if you want to do professional print it is pretty much necessary and there is no way around it however shitty the program is. (Really they should just put all the Indesign functions into Illustrator and get rid of Indesign)
You should learn how to handle big texts and articles, color swatches are usefull so you should use them.
Most importantly make sure your file is alright for printing, Make sure the output of all your pictures is 300dpi. Make sure your PDF output setting are high/for printing. Make sure there are no tiny gaps between element so you dont have a white hair-thin line in your print where it should not be. Make sure your file has enough bleed around your page so its alright when the printer cuts the sheets.
There are a couple of things you could potentially fuck up here. You should get someone(in person) who has experience in print to look over your file throughoutly because if it is your first time doing print you will probably fuck something up your first time if there is noone to correct you.
>>247686
>Indesign is kinda like a castrated Illustrator + downgraded microsoft word.
Actually, InDesign is a completely different kind of application than Illustrator and in capable hands, affords you far more freedom than that abomination Word.
It is disgusting that people call themselves Designers and even compare the two in the way you just did.
>Really they should just put all the Indesign functions into Illustrator and get rid of Indesign)
This sentence shows a fundamental ignorance for what InDesign and Illustrator do. One is a program for professional layout, the other for illustrations. I´ll let you figure out yourself, which is which.
I´ve had to deal with years worth of editorial layouts made in Illustrator by incompetent "designers" and have no patience for such steaming bullshit.
>>247657
As for InDesign itself, the most important principle is that it lets you bring together graphical elements into an integrated layout. That´s what you need frames for. Into these frames, you link all the photos, logos, and whatever else you need in your layout. I recommend making a separate "Links" file where you put all your linked elements.
There is also an option to export your ID document together with all the linked files into a collected file.
Take care not to lose the linked files, or the Indesign file will be useless without them.
The actual reason for this "linked" approach is that this way you can make a layout combining numerous huge files without your computer having to handle the amount of data it would need
to if you just loaded the real files into a document.
Of course, InDesign actually does offer a sizeable number of native designing options as well, but that is too comples a subject for a post like this.
>>247689
You didnt disprove anything I said Mr. Muh Layout.
In both your replies you misrepresent my point in your first sentence and in you second sentence you just start insulting. Is that like a "average shitpost"-template you got there?
Everything you say boils down to:
>Illustration must be done in Illustrator and layouts must be done in Indesign
Like I said there is no reason Illustrator doesnt have all the functions Indesign has or vice versa, aside from Adobe not being able to charge you for two programs at once instead of just putting everything into one program and most people in media not seeing that adobe rips them off because most of them are technical illiterates anyway.
>the other for illustrations.
Then its a pretty lousy tool for illustrations because aside from Vector graphics it isnt usefull to make illustrations( Maybe you consider logos and icons illustrations, I dont know. There is an actual job called "Illustrator" and it doesnt entail moving verts around for the most part) Again, no reason Illustrator shouldnt have all the features Indesign has, because you need fucking both applications anyway, you understand? When you do 3d it would be fucking stupid if I have to start up Autodesk Animator and Autodesk Modeller in two seperate programs, especially when those programs are owned by the same company, just put it into one fucking program.
>>247690
>That´s what you need frames for.
- I'd vehmently argue, *no one* needs as rigid a frame structure as InDesign seems to need - if you are a beginner and used to, say, PS, and the freedom of throwing bits round at random, ALL THOSE FUCKING FRAMES for everything will drive you mad for a while.. then, you will (maybe) get used to it, and just resent them a bit, and wonder ocasionally, 'oh Adobe, all these fucking boxes, why..' - apart from that tho..
>I´ve had to deal with years worth of editorial layouts made in Illustrator by incompetent "designers" and have no patience for such steaming bullshit.
- A-men to that. One advantage InDesign does inarguably offer over Illustrator, it is an actual layout-n-publishing program - as such, it provides various advantages and features towards making your life easier. All this 'LAYOUTS MUST BE IN .ai FORMAT, BECAUSE VECTORS' - its a fucking plague, caused by fucking 'designers' who really, really do not know sh!t from shoeshine. Fuck ai, it's not, and never will be, a usable DTP format, like, just stop doing this, please. Lay it out @ the correct size and resolution in raster already, you stoopid fucks.
>>247686
>>247693
>Like I said there is no reason Illustrator doesnt have all the functions Indesign has or vice versa
Like I said, there actually is a reason and it´s that both programs do very different things. Adobe rips us off in many ways, but overloading a single program with the functionality of two isn´t one of them. I´m sorry you think InDesign is basically the same as Illustrator, don´t really know what to tell you.
>Then its a pretty lousy tool for illustrations because aside from Vector graphics it isnt usefull to make illustrations
Ok, so you don´t like vector illustrations, terrific.
>Again, no reason Illustrator shouldnt have all the features Indesign has, because you need fucking both applications anyway, you understand?
Hey, I´ve got an idea, why not have a program that does everything the whole Adobe Suite does in one? We need them all anyways and interchange files between them constantly. Such a hassle, maaaan. Managing hardware resources and programming for such an application shouldn´t pose much of a problem.
