With creative and publishing tool makers promoting their products, hyping them more than ever, and sometimes taking potshots at the competition, it can be difficult to see the forest through the reams. Is InDesign or QuarkXPress better suited to your needs? Are you doing too much in Photoshop when using Illustrator could increase productivity and creativity? Is your organization–and PDF–truly ready to go paperless? Can your publication use InCopy out of its box, or must you look into a broader solution like WoodWing?
These are just a few questions facing creative, advertising, and publishing workflows, both in agencies and in corporate production departments today. They aren’t easily answered.
Once a font of useful information, search engine queries on creative products and processes deliver at least as much misinformation and confusion as reliable data and clarity. Websites like Quark VS InDesign.com help filter some of the mud from the water, but even that independent resource cannot answer the question of which tool is better for your specific needs. Downloading evaluation software is a good first step, but how effectively can one truly test out brand new software in 14-30 days? First one must learn to use the software, often from general interest books that only touch on the basics, and then try to use it in simulated work scenarios. What other changes will need to be made to accommodate the new tool? How well does it work with other mission-critical tools? Will it work with your current assets like fonts, imagery, and other media, or will you need to upgrade or convert them, too? If media must be converted, what tools are needed to effect the conversion and how much clean-up work will be required? Can the new tool work with legacy documents, or must they be recreated by hand?
Our objective workflow consultants can help you cut through the hype and clutter to present a clear view of the true impact of a migration on your workflow.