Sneak Peek: InDesign CS3

Adobe uncharacteristically takes the wraps off new features of InDesign CS3--a year early.

This week, Adobe pre­sent­ed select­ed mem­bers of the press with sneak peeks at upcom­ing products–and per­mis­sion to pub­lish that infor­ma­tion. Still near­ly a year until the release of Creative Suite 3, per­mis­sion to pub­lish about fea­tures such as those you’ll read below is unprece­dent­ed from the com­pa­ny near­ly as famous for it’s strict­ly enforced “no com­ment about unan­nounced soft­ware” pol­i­cy as for the soft­ware itself.

My esteemed col­league, David Blatner, beat me to press with an overview of the InDesign CS3 fea­tures we were both shown. Read David’s post on the new InDesignSecrets blog, but return here to fill in the details of InDesign CS3’s Object Effects, attribute-level trans­paren­cy, and vast­ly improved con­tent place­ment features.

In my brief­ing with Adobe’s Chad Siegel, senior prod­uct man­ag­er InDesign and InCopy, I learned about the new fea­tures (includ­ing things I can’t yet tell you), and, more impor­tant­ly, actu­al­ly saw them in use. Unfortunately, because the user inter­face of InDesign is still very much open to change, screen­shots are not allowed. You’ll have to take my word that these fea­tures work.

Multi-Asset Place

Among the most tedious and time-consuming tasks in page lay­out is plac­ing assets–external images and text. In pri­or ver­sions, InDesign eased the process by allow­ing drag-and-drop of images and tex­tu­al files from the desk­top, Mac Finder, Windows Explorer, Bridge, and oth­er file- or asset-managing sys­tems. Images, for exam­ple, could be dropped into InDesign en masse by drag­ging from Bridge; those images would all drop into the same loca­tion in the doc­u­ment, to be posi­tioned lat­er. It saved some time, but not as much as the new multi-asset place.

Instead of choos­ing a sin­gle exter­nal file via File > Place, in CS3 you’ll be able to select an entire fold­er full all at once. Doing that, loads the place cur­sor with all of those files, ready to be placed sequen­tial­ly. The cur­sor will show a count of the lined up assets, and a live pre­view of the next one on deck. Previews show thumb­nails for to-be-placed images and the first few words of tex­tu­al assets like Word doc­u­ments. Clicking in a pre-existing frame or draw­ing a new one places the first asset and loads the next into the batter’s box. It’s real­ly some­thing to see, and makes fill­ing a lay­out with assets fast and smooth.

Frame Fitting Options

Working along­side the multi-asset place is anoth­er fore­head smack­er: Frame Fitting Options. Instead of one at a time set­ting the crop­ping amount or fit­ting style of images placed in InDesign CS3, you’ll be able to define a default fit­ting style–none, Fit Content to Frame, Fit Content Proportionally, or Fit Frame Proportionally. After set­ting the option, every sub­se­quent­ly placed image (or frame) will auto­mat­i­cal­ly fit its frame (or con­tent) to match your set­ting. When plac­ing a selec­tion of images that require crop­ping, four-way crop mea­sure­ment box­es also allow you to pre­set how much to chop off the top, bot­tom, left, or right, and from which ref­er­ence point the crop­ping should occur.

Attribute-Level Transparency

Although we won’t see Illustrator’s Appearance palette in InDesign CS3, we will see the foun­da­tion for it in sep­a­rate trans­paren­cy and blend­ing mode con­trol for a frame’s fill, stroke, and con­tent. In the revamped Transparency palette, each frame or object now has selec­table entries for all three, which can be indi­vid­u­al­ly tar­get­ed and adjust­ed with the opac­i­ty slid­er. The back­ground col­or of a text frame, for instance, can be set to 50% trans­par­ent while the text itself remains com­plete­ly opaque. Even bet­ter, each attribute can have its own blend­ing mode inde­pen­dent of, or in con­junc­tion with, an over­all object blend­ing mode that effects the fill, stroke, and con­tent simul­ta­ne­ous­ly. For exam­ple, con­sid­er a plac­ing an image inside a col­ored frame, and set­ting the image blend mode to Screen such that it blends with its own con­tain­er, and then, in a com­pound­ed effect, the con­tain­er and its con­tent is blend­ed into oth­er page objects with an Overlay mode.

Each attribute entry in the Transparency palette lists its blend mode and opac­i­ty per­cent­age, so you’ll nev­er be left won­der­ing what you or your pre­de­ces­sor did to achieve that mar­velous (or hideous) effect.

Photoshop Effects

In addi­tion to inde­pen­dent trans­paren­cy and blend­ing mode con­trol, object fills, strokes, and con­tent will each have access to Photoshop effects.

In a dia­log vir­tu­al­ly iden­ti­cal to Photoshop’s Layer Styles, InDesign CS3’s Transparency Effects dia­log enables Drop Shadow, Inner Shadow, Outer Glow, Inner Glow, Bevel and Emboss, Satin, Basic Feather, Gradient Feather, and an all new Directional Feather for objects. Like Photoshop’s Layer Styles, Transparency Effects lists the com­pound­able effects in sep­a­rate panes with all the options one might expect–including Photoshop’s intu­itive angle dial, an alti­tude mea­sure­ment box, and a glob­al light option. Each object attribute has an inde­pen­dent list of effects. There are iden­ti­cal effects avail­able for the entire object and indi­vid­u­al­ly its stroke, fill, and content.

During the demon­stra­tion, Transparency Effects were used to bev­el and emboss just the stroke of a text frame, leav­ing the fill and text flat. Then, the frame was resized to show a smooth and instan­ta­neous redraw of the object and its effects. Once applied, Transparency Effects do not hin­der mod­i­fi­ca­tion of the object. In fact, the effects may be removed or them­selves mod­i­fied, and they can even be instant­ly copied to oth­er objects.

Again tak­ing a cue from Photoshop, when Transparency Effects are applied to objects or attrib­ut­es in InDesign CS3, their entries on the Transparency palette dis­play a styl­ized icon. That icon can be dragged from one attribute to another–say, from the fill to the stroke–to move or copy the effects from one to anoth­er. In a stroke of pro­duc­tiv­i­ty genius, the f icon can also be dragged to oth­er objects on the page, instant­ly apply­ing effects to those. Styling an entire spread of objects will take seconds!

Object Styles, of course, now track the new fea­tures, but the drag-and-drop method is even faster when work­ing with just a few objects on the same spread.

These effects–and many more to come–are enabled by the inclu­sion of what Adobe called a â€œheadless ver­sion of Photoshop” in the InDesign code. In terms clos­er to layman’s, large sec­tions of Photoshop CS3 func­tion­al­i­ty are being pulled into InDesign CS3 by includ­ing the actu­al code writ­ten by the Photoshop team rather than via the hit-or-miss emu­la­tion we’ve often seen used in the past to bring fea­tures of point prod­uct into another.

Tidbits

Of course, InDesign CS3 and all of the Creative Suite 3 will be Universal Binaries for Intel-based Macs, and will be Vista-optimized for Windows. In fact, the cur­rent builds of the appli­ca­tions are already run­ning on these platforms!

At the same time Adobe showed us InDesign CS3, they pre­viewed a new tech­nol­o­gy, code-named “Apollo” to Publish​.com. You can read about that here.

Renewed Commitment

The point of attribute-level trans­paren­cy and effects is, of course, doing more with live, editable objects in InDesign with­out the need to import Illustrator or Photoshop art­work. Although Adobe promis­es a much tighter inte­gra­tion between the Creative Suite point products–including those brought into the fold by the Macromedia acquisition–there is an equal focus on refin­ing the line between appli­ca­tions. Each iter­a­tion of the major appli­ca­tions have brought clos­er rela­tions and con­tent shar­ing between them, but Adobe is also try­ing to find the right mix of what each appli­ca­tion should do native­ly. How much should InDesign do inter­nal­ly before requir­ing the assis­tance of Illustrator or Photoshop, is a key ques­tion asked through­out the ongo­ing devel­op­ment of InDesign CS3. From what I’ve seen so far, Adobe is com­ing up with some excel­lent answers to that question.

In addi­tion to show­ing off some cool fea­tures we’ll def­i­nite­ly see when InDesign CS3 ships in the 2nd quar­ter of 2007, Adobe made it clear that they have big plans for the future of publishing–in all media. Although the details are still hush hush, look for some tru­ly amaz­ing ideas to arise from the com­bi­na­tion of Macromedia tech­nol­o­gy and Adobe inge­nu­ity. Although Macromedia walked away from print pub­lish­ing work­flows, Adobe has found new ways to use their tech­nol­o­gy to the ben­e­fit of print pub­lish­ing, as well as, of course, to Web, motion, and mobile publishing.

Although all my ques­tions couldn’t be answered at this ear­ly date (it’s still Adobe, after all), I’m excit­ed about what I’ve seen so far. And, cool as they are, the InDesign CS3 fea­tures aren’t half as entic­ing as what Adobe won’t let me say… Yet.

Note: The “InDesign CS3” logo at the top of this arti­cle is an artist’s ren­di­tion, and is not relat­ed to Adobe’s planned InDesign CS3 brand­ing in any way. Illustration by Vadim Litvak

20 thoughts on “Sneak Peek: InDesign CS3

  1. hunter

    Early press on CS3 = excel­lent mar­ket­ing. Effectively down­grades the release of Quark 7.

  2. carmen

    quark is a very inter­est­ing site about the arti­cle i’m always search­ing infor­ma­tion about adobe’s new features.
    Do you have any gmail invi­ta­tions left??????I real­ly could use a gmail account. Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. Peter

    @hunter:
    I agree, the dis­clo­sure date of the CS3 fea­tures, espe­cial­ly the Quark 7‑like trans­paren­cy set­tings, could not have been a coincidence.

    That’s clever marketing:
    Put some salt into the drinks of the Quark guys cel­e­brat­ing the release of Quark 7 next week in New York.

    Greetings
    Peter

  4. Bolla, Zoltán

    Very-very need „Opacity Mask” in InDesign CS3 v5.0, like Illustrator CS2 v12.0. QuarkXPress 7.0 too, as mint alpha (chan­nel) transparency.

    Please Adobe coders, please!!!

  5. Dishch

    Running head­ers and foot­ers, spread­ing heads like in framemak­er need­ed. How long must we wait for that fea­tures? Why don’t they take best fea­tures from Framemaker to InDesign?

  6. RJay

    How very Microsoft-like of them.

    Can’t peo­ple just com­pete on fea­tures in ship­ping prod­ucts? We don’t need this “yes, but” our prod­uct that’s going to ship in a year will be even bet­ter than the one avail­able now.

  7. Mike Perry, Inkling Books

    Bringing more Photoshop fea­tures into InDesign is great. I’ve shift­ed to doing book cov­ers in InDesign but I’ve been frus­trat­ed by what it can’t do that Photoshop can. But as a book pub­lish­er, I keep won­der­ing when Adobe is going to bring the mar­velous fea­tures of FrameMaker into InDesign. As oth­ers have point­ed out, we need head­ings that span columns, run­ning heads, and FM-like side­bars. All are fea­tures FrameMaker had over a decade ago. Endnotes would be great too. Publishing aban­doned foot­notes in the 1960s.

  8. Alistair Dabbs

    Funny how Adobe has been rub­bish­ing Quark Vista for ages, and is now plan­ning to do exact­ly the same thing in InDesign CS3. Also intrigu­ing is that Quark has a com­mer­cial inter­est in mak­ing it unnec­es­sary for page lay­out artists to own Photoshop (it reduces the chances of them buy­ing a low-cost Creative Suite upgrade and there­fore a copy of InDesign by default), while I had imag­ined it would be against Adobe’s com­mer­cial inter­ests to be active­ly doing it as well.

  9. Kathleen

    This is going to put the Quark boys to ulti­mate shame. Next week in New York they are going to need more than an asprin and salt in their drinks while they cel­e­brate the release of Quark 7… they are going to need some major downtime.

  10. S.H.

    Why don’t they take best fea­tures from Framemaker to InDesign?”

    While there are a lot of good fea­tures in FrameMaker that InDesign could ben­e­fit from, do remem­ber they are for dif­fer­ent things. FrameMaker is all about text author­ing, while InDesign is about graph­ic design. They use very dif­fer­ent philoso­phies in pro­duct­ing dif­fer­ent styles of documents.

  11. Herbert Post author

    Quark makes my neck hurt. But InDesign makes my oth­er neck hurt. Many things make my neck hurt. I don’t like when my neck hurts. Please stop hurt­ing my neck.

  12. M Jenius

    Those are all great fea­tures. But in the end I tink that one of the tricks Adobe has up it’s sleeve it’s not real­ly in Indesign but rather in PDF. Even hard­core Quark fanat­ics have to come across PDF. Everyone in the office is famil­iar with PDF, if not already in love with it. Same with the print­ers, Even those who are stick­ing with Quark are able to take PDF files. Even if Quark came up with it’s own photshop-like pro­gram and stoped it’s users from buy­ing adobe pro­grams. They still can’t fill the gap held by Acrobat Pro. that’s one thing Quark has no con­trol over. Quark just plain out sucks when it comes to PDF and don’t even get me start­ed with EPS. That’s my guess. And in case any­one has­n’t noticed, I just love this web­site. I’ll shut up now. What does every­one else think?

  13. Pariah S. Burke Post author

    Very astute, M Jenius. Quark has been try­ing to work with JAWS PDF for quite some time. Do you see JAWS as a means of enabling Quark to com­pete with Acrobat?

  14. M Jenius

    We’ll have to see. I was sur­prised that Quark 7 is able to export (func­tion­al) PDF with­out hav­ing to use Distiller. I heard that there’s still a few print­er issues, but Adobe had those ini­tial issues too. Now that Acrobat and Acrobat Pro is so inte­grat­ed in every busi­ness. I doubt that users will ditch Acrobat and jump to JAWS. I’m guess­ing that JAWS has the same fea­tures as Adobe’s (I’ve nev­er used JAWS prod­ucts). But as more Quark users use PDF files, they no an longer claim that you can’t get a decent print from PDF, and that only helps Adobe. If any­thing they’ll only soft­en the wall of the many Quark only print­ers. I’m sure that they have of known this, but I think that Quark is done play­ing “high and mighty”. It looks like they stoped resist­ing progress and is now want­i­ng to com­pete. At the same time Adobe prob­a­bly saw this com­ing (I seri­ous­ly think that they employ a secret depar­ment of sooth­say­ers). This is why I think that Adobe is going to up the ante with PDF.

  15. M Jenius

    sor­ry for the typos. That’s why we have copy­writ­ers here… phew

  16. Peter

    @Jenius:
    Strange thinking…
    -
    Quark has been export­ing PDF since ver­sion 4.x (ok, with many issues) and is final­ly doing a good PDF export job in ver­sion 6.5 and 7.
    -
    Furthermore, Jaws is includ­ed free of charge, where­as for PDF cre­ation on the client via Distiller you have to buy an Acrobat license.
    .
    And then I think the war won’t be decid­ed over the abil­i­ty to out­put PDF, as PostScript is also an Adobe tech­nol­o­gy and both, Pagemaker and Quark do out­put PostScript.

  17. M Jenius

    Yes, yes, and yes… but this is in com­par­i­son to Indesign. PDF export in 7 is great, I’m not sure about 6.5, we have to use Distiller with 6.5 to get a good PDF (and my god it takes so long). I agree, the war won’t be decid­ed over PDF. All I’m say­ing is that Adobe will prob­a­bly come out with some­thing new in future PDF ver­sions.…. OK OK, i’m just crazy

  18. jojo

    Aren’t you excit­ed about Table styles? And the new fea­tures in Find/Replace?

  19. FrankenShank

    Gotta hand it to Quark… QX 7 is great!
    The Alpha Mask fea­ture just makes my life so much eas­i­er, and the trans­paren­cy fea­tures allow me to do my usu­al “you have 5 min­utes to do this ad GO!” ads with new life.

Comments are closed.