cs advantages over illy 10

[Philip_Peterson@adobeforums.com]

If you had to justify an upgrade to cs from illustrator 10 for a printing company, what would you tell your penny pinching computer department as advantages?

Kinda off topic, but I figure I can use all the ammo I can get...

[B. Philippus]

Philip:

Frankly, I don't know why you'd want to upgrade to CS right now, I don't think I've ever seen so many complaints about a new version of Illustrator in my life! I'm waiting until at least CS.0.2 before thinking about upgrading.

That said, obviously you absolutely can't open anything for editing that was made by all those many clients who already have CS wink wink. Especially that new text engine makes it impossible to live without CS.

Bert

[Timothy_Foolery®@adobeforums.com]

Can't you just import the files? Or is that what all the winking was about? ;)

[Jacob_Bugge@adobeforums.com]

Philip, How about these arguments?

1) It will be an invaluable excuse for deadline failure;
2) It is boring without it: everyone else gets the thrill of crashes and stuff.
3) Only sissies wait;
4) Stress increases creativity;
5) When you have no great stories about crashes and the like, everyone will know you are far behind, and that marks you as unprofessional.

Quoting an unprofessional and uncreative sissy who likes boredom and solid deadlines.

By the way did you know that originally deadline was the line where fleeing prisoners were shot dead?

[John_Kallios@adobeforums.com]

The new type engine is main issue with backsaving that users seem to complain the most and do not accept why it cannot backsave without issue.

Me, I understand, accept and am fine with it. It DOES require that both 10 and CS run side by side if you receive files from many sources. (If you want to be purely in X)

Why should your dept add CS?

Well if you deal with spot color, CS offers way more support in conjuction with placed raster images and fixes issues with transparency in the artwork when saved to eps.

Open type, increased perfomance, 3d feature, scribble effect (don't knock it until you try it.)

The biggest reason for me is two-fold, speed and the added spot support.(Still needs much more support)

[Rick Moore]

The Print dialog is completely different. It's similar to Photoshop's Print
with Preview and it's one of my favorite enhancements in CS, along with the
faster redraw speed

[Poul_Solbjerg_Holst@adobeforums.com]

That goes for the pdf export too, it's like InDesigns, much better than
10, with the options for cropmarks and bleed, and the pdf gets the
correct trimbox, wich is much needed in a pdf workflow...

Poul Solbjerg

[Alexander_Kogan.@adobeforums.com]

....doesn't it also export multi-page PDF from tiled pages?

[Poul_Solbjerg_Holst@adobeforums.com]

Not when saving as pdf, you have to print to Acrobat.....

Poul Solbjerg

[Alexander_Kogan.@adobeforums.com]

....well, at least it does :) To Acrobat or to Distiller?

[TD_Toomey@adobeforums.com]

Jacob,

By the way did you know that originally deadline was the line where fleeing
prisoners were shot dead?




I didn't know that, but it sure feels like that sometimes. Adds new meaning to drop-dead deadline, which is a phrase I seem to live by.

Since I freelance, I have to stay in step with my clients. The one who sends me the most work is still using AI9. I've discovered that the path of least resistance in preparing files for them is to start out in AI9.

I work in a traditional print-publishing environment where text is prepared in Word on a PC, images are prepared in AI and Photoshop on Mac, and layout is done in Quark on Macs. Given the shakey bottom line for most publishing houses, not to mention that the workflow for their Art/Production staffs is already stretched to the limit, I have a hard time imagining them going to the expense of licencing upgrades until they absolutely have to, not to mention the time and angst required for retraining staff.

I've heard mention from one publisher that they'd like to migrate to InDesign, but that would mean InDesign CS (since I don't think Adobe sells earlier versions). Migrating to CS would require upgrading to new Mac OSX machines or new Windows machines, plus retraining all of their staff, all the while maintaining the production schedule. I have a hard time seeing that happen. And that's assuming their service bureau is using CS, which I kind of doubt.

Is anyone else working in this environment? Do you see CS coming soon to a publishing house near you?

Meantime, I'm having to upgrade to CS and get a new Mac OSX to sit side by side with my XP machine for one client. Not that I mind. I just look at it as new toys, though I did have other new, non-IT goodies on my toy list for this year's budget.

Cheers, Toni

[Jacob_Bugge@adobeforums.com]

Toni,

Angst or common sense? It may be dangerous to leave what you know, and for a publishing house as the one you mention the crashes you can read about in some of the earlier CS threads may lead to a real life crash.

But I believe it is hard to advice others, as you may see from this thread. Myself, I feel lucky with AI10 on XP. At first I thought crashes were something new which happened with CS; now I believe new versions are increasingly sensitive to the interaction with other PC elements. So maybe the best advice is to weigh the need for the new against the risk of problems you do not have now.

[TD_Toomey@adobeforums.com]

Jacob,

I'm with you as far as AI10 on XP. I haven't had any problems. I'm forced to go to CS and OSX for one non-publishing client. But like I said, to me it's new (expensive) toys that I don't really object to. I also enjoy learning new tricks. But not everyone is comfortable having to learn a whole bag of new tricks--such as learning a new operating system (from what I'm told, OSX is different enough from earlier-generation Macs that there's a learning curve). For artists under the gun like they are in publishers' Art Departments and who are happy with the software and equipment at hand, there would be a certain level of "angst" being forced to learn new systems.

I wouldn't presume to advise a client about what system to use. I'm just a handy blip on their radar because I can absorb some of the overflow from their frantic production schedules (lucky for me). Last year, I insinuated myself into their graphics department by illustrating the book I was editing for them, then offering to sell them the illustrations if they liked them. It was a given that I'd illustrate the next project. On the latest editing assignment from them, there were no illustrations, but I did all of the photography and Photoshopped jpegs sent by the author. The jury is still out on whether or not they'll buy my work. But with the production schedule being so tight on this book, I don't think they really have a choice (it's pretty decent photograhy anyway). I work in the software versions they use because it's too messy to do otherwise. One client last year was still using AI8. No layers, ugh!

Because of the huge expense, I don't see print-media book publishers migrating to the new systems any sooner than they absolutely have to. If it ain't broke, don't fix it (especially since "fixing" it might break it in the case of CS). I'm waiting to see which way they jump with regard to migrating to InDesign or upgrading Quark. What I *really* want to do when I grow up is book design and layout. Either program will be a big investment for me in money and time to master the software. That's why I was wondering if anyone else here has a sense of which way the wind is blowing with regard to CS, MacOSX, etc. in the book-publishing end of things.

Cheers, Toni