For Years I've used FH to make programs for our community theatre...programs
(booklets) in landscape mode, two columns per page, duplex printing.
Sometimes four pages printed duplex which makes a nice 16 page program
folded and stapled with jpgs and/or png files imported from Fireworks. It
takes a bit of planning since FH doesn't do pages imposition. The finished
program prints on a laser printer exactly as it appears on the
screen...something I've never been able to accomplish using Word. I've tried
using Cocobooklet and Word, but the margins are always wonky.FH rules when
it comes to making booklets with the exception of lacking page imposition.

We really can't afford a printing service, so a good copier plus some
volunteer folding and stapling have allowed us to produce some very nice
programs.

If it becomes necessary to upgrade to an Adobe product, and given our
primary need for booklet creation, which product will work best for us?
PageMaker? InDesign?

Quark and it's ilk seems overkill and very pricy.

Word would work, but it's margins are always slightly off-center from what
it shows on the screen. FH, on the contrary, has no problem printing exactly
what's on the screen and I never have to play games compensating for margin
offsets. Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks,

Joe Newbury

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 08:59:08 +0300, Charles Newbury <newburcj@epix.net> wrote:

> For Years I've used FH to make programs for our community theatre...programs
> (booklets) in landscape mode, two columns per page, duplex printing.
> Sometimes four pages printed duplex which makes a nice 16 page program

[Snip]

> If it becomes necessary to upgrade to an Adobe product, and given our
> primary need for booklet creation, which product will work best for us?
> PageMaker? InDesign?

> Quark and it's ilk seems overkill and very pricy.

InDesign is in fact upgraded PageMaker. Also upgrade of FreeHand is more likely than upgrade of PageMaker. InDesign is overkill too but you do not have to use all the features. Body text features and quality is way beuond FreeHand or any program for that matter.

Sine bot PageMaker and FreeHAnd once were Aldus's produts you may feel at home using InDesign because the similarity is still there.

It is said that Quark is the program for professionals - with 20 years of graphic design experience I have not figured out the profession yet.

> Word would work, but it's margins are always slightly off-center from what
> it shows on the screen. FH, on the contrary, has no problem printing exactly
> what's on the screen and I never have to play games compensating for margin
> offsets. Any suggestions would be helpful.

Word is a word processor not a layout program. Working with text styles for example is a nightmre. If you go for Microsoft product Publisher is much better choice for layout.

Jukka

> InDesign is in fact upgraded PageMaker.

Where do you get this, Jukka? As I understand it, InD was built from the
ground up and is entirely different from PageMaker. Yes, it uses some interface
similarities, but it is not an "upgraded PageMaker."

InDesign itself is a tiny plug-in launcher. Everything else in the program
comes from the individual plug-ins. This modular architecture is very different
from PageMaker.

JET

PageMaker and InDesign are vastly different. I know when I tried to use
PageMaker in the past, I never got used to it. I was strictly a QuarkXPress
user. InDesign had a much closer feel to FreeHand.

Here's a thought I had...do you think Adobe would consider? I think FreeHand
users should have a choice what program they would like to upgrade to. some
people bought FreeHand for it's Flash capabilities. Some for it's illustration,
and some users for page layout. How about offering an upgrade to either Flash,
Illustrator or InDesign, according to your preference? I think I would rather
upgrade to InDesign over Illustrator and if FreeHand is no longer being updated
(I hope that's not true), why not give us the choice?

DJ,
I think it is extremely difficult to upgrade from Freehand to another ONLY ONE
Adobe application. Freehand is so multipractic that is impossible to upgrade to
just only one application.
And to tell the truth, I'm still expecting to hear Adobe's official statement
regarding the FH future. Until then I won't think of upgrading to another
application. At the end, I must stress that if I need to upgrade - it won't be
Adobe. You can call it stubborn and stupid but they let FH users down and I
will try my luck with Xara. I'm already satisfied with Xara and I believe that
the next version will be very good FH alternative. But that's me.

Bembelembe,

Don't get me wrong...I didn't give up the fight for a FreeHand update yet! I don't want to upgrade to another program yet either.

> If it becomes necessary to upgrade to an Adobe product, and given our
> primary need for booklet creation, which product will work best for us?
> PageMaker? InDesign?
>
> Quark and it's ilk seems overkill and very pricy.

Is this just for your inhouse use? If so, then 'unvirsal compatibility' is a
bit less of an issue for you and you might want to try some of the other
less expensive options out there:

http://www.scribus.net/ (open source/Free)

http://www.apple.com/iwork/pages/ (couple hundred $ / OSX only)

As for Adobe, I'd probably skip PageMaker for InDesign. Pagemaker is only
slighly above Freehand in prestige...it's still sold, but really hassn't had
a serious update in ages.

-Darrel

> Where do you get this, Jukka? As I understand it, InD was built from the
> ground up and is entirely different from PageMaker. Yes, it uses some interface
> similarities, but it is not an "upgraded PageMaker."

It is built from the round up of course but it is clearly based on PageMaker. I forgot to put quotation marks around upgrade, though.

Jukka