Quark Versus InDesign In Newspapers

Despite the hype, neither InDesign nor QuarkXPress fully answers the needs of newspapers.

Quark vs. InDesign in Newspaper Production
Quark vs. InDesign in Newspaper Production

Newspapers run faster, lean­er, and are more col­lab­o­ra­tive than oth­er desk­top lay­out work­flow. On the one hand, the rapid­i­ty of their pub­li­ca­tion, the vol­ume of con­tent, and the num­ber of per­son­nel involved in their pro­duc­tion makes them more dif­fi­cult, and the demand they place on their sofware more rig­or­ous. On the oth­er hand, sev­er­al major sell­ing points of lay­out appli­ca­tions are nev­er touched in news­pa­per pro­duc­tion because news design is invari­ably built on rigid grids with an equal­ly rigid style guide; the pro­duc­tion of a paper depends on con­trolled box­es, and rarely uses drop shad­ows, feath­ers, trans­paren­cy, or the oth­er cre­ative fea­tures of an appli­ca­tion typ­i­cal­ly employed by adver­tis­ing, mag­a­zine, and oth­er workflows.

The ques­tion of InDesign or QuarkXPress, while eval­u­at­ed by most cre­ative pro­fes­sion­als from the stand­point of the lat­est ver­sion’s fea­tures, is, in the news­pa­per world, typ­i­cal­ly appraised from the per­spec­tive of automa­tion and col­lab­o­ra­tion. Indeed, while most design­ers look for ways to expand their cre­ative choic­es in the next ver­sion of QuarkXPress or InDesign, news­pa­pers fret over how much they will be required to change their pro­ce­dures while address­ing long-standing needs. Moreover, nei­ther appli­ca­tion is suit­ed for a news­pa­per pro­duc­tion work­flow out of the box. They both require cus­tomiza­tion and helper appli­ca­tions, and they both have their pros and cons.

In “Design Software at Newspapers,” Designorati:News Design edi­tor Dhyana Sansoucie, a ten year vet­er­an of news­pa­per design, turns a crit­i­cal eye toward both QuarkXPress and InDesign in a real world news­pa­per pro­duc­tion workflow.

2 thoughts on “Quark Versus InDesign In Newspapers

  1. Tom McGowran

    Having used pro­grams such as Pagemaker, RSG3 , Quark and In Design over the last 20 years these pro­grams are essen­tial­ly for page make up. Programs such as Creator do a much bet­ter job for you in set­ting indi­vid­ual adver­tise­ments that can then be placed in Quark or In Design. This is a very clean and rapid way of pro­duc­ing news­pa­per pages.
    Tom McGowran

  2. Bazil Raubach

    Having oper­at­ed in the dig­i­tal realm of page make up and design for a good 15 years – start­ing with Pagemaker and cur­rent­ly being forced to oper­ate Tera/ GN3 (Goodnews) as deci­at­ed news­pa­per and lay­out package
    I would have say that GN3 is an effe­ci­ate if not sou­less pack­age, you forced to oper­ate in a source code win­dow and it feels far to much like DOS envi­ron­ment sometimes.
    At home I pro­duce a range of pub­li­ca­tions, adverts and design projects using the entire Creative Suite . For pure news­pa­per design, lay­out, edit­ing etc… a basic if not cheap and nasty pack­age does a very work­man like job of putting our news­pa­per. There are no frills, no trans­paren­cy, or bells or whistls just an abil­i­ty to wack out pages with the min­mum of fuss.
    So if we are talk­ing no frills – GN3 does a fair job, but I am design­er dammit!, not just a sub edi­tor and some­times infor­ma­tion needs soul, colour, deep etch­es and trans­paren­cies, noth­ing touch­es Indesign for ease of use, tools and sta­bil­i­ty. Quark crashed when I want­ed to out­put .pdfs, it was a cranky prog­er­amme that cost me mon­ey. Indesign, Creative Suite has paid for itself again and again need I say more .…..?

Comments are closed.