Setup to import into InDesign

[Elliott_Tank@adobeforums.com]

I get files from customers that I would like to output from InDesign, but when I place them into ID they don't include bleed. I even remove the crop marks and still no bleed. I did a test to find out how to get artwork from AI into ID and here is what seems to work.

1. Set art board to the exact size of finished piece.
2. Create art with bleed extending past edge of art board
3. Create crop marks to define the bleed area.

Then import into ID with import options turned on and select art. This brings the AI file in with just the amount of bleed defined by crops.

I am not a season AI user, so could someone let me know if I am correct or got this all messed up, because I need to educate my customer are the correct procedures.

[Scott_Falkner@adobeforums.com]

You don't need to have crop marks (in fact, Illustrator's implementation of crop marks is about as bass ackwards as you can get). So long as your artwork is to size, including bleeds, you're fine.

EG: Make your arwork 8.75" x 11.25" and place on a letter sized page, bleeding by 0.125" on all four sides.

[Elliott_Tank@adobeforums.com]

Thanks Scott,

I have been a Freehand user for years, but I love InDesign and the CS package. AI CS printing has made AI a much more livable program. I only use AI for graphic to add to ID.

It seems more often than not people set up their page size to all different sizes, whatever they feel like. I believe the correct way is to set your document set up to the size of the finished piece. Why try to draw crops page edges when the programs can do that for you? Even in AI if one is going to design a 8.5 x 11 piece that is the size of the art board. This defines the document boundaries without having to draw them or move guide to define them. Then like your advice say, if the document bleeds, after you are done laying out you just bump the art board size up to include your bleed if you need to export it for another program.

[Scott_Falkner@adobeforums.com]

The problem as I see it is that too often people use Illustrator as a layout application, but don't appreciate the differences between Illustrator and true layout programs. I use it for this, too. But I understand the differences, such as the arbitrary box that most users would call a "page" but which does not, necessarily, have anything to do with the trim size of a printed piece. With that awareness, I am able to better prepare the file (like go to the Object menu to add my crop marks, which so clearly belong in the print window it's no wonder nobody bothers).

Adobe has been trying to segragate layout features and illustration features between InDesign/PageMaker and Illustrator. Unfortunately, users aren't willing to adapt to Adobe's philosophy, and only recently has Adobe shown a willingness to bridge the gap by improving the layout features of Illustrator.

I find it much more intuitive to deal with a "page" in Indesign, because that is the fundamental component of the layout. In Illustrator, the page is just a convenient box to put your artwork in, yet many more steps are required in order for that page to behave the way you would want it to. Too many people don't bother, to the utter frustration of production artists who inevitibly must clean up the messes.