Jump to content

Recommended Posts

PM was good for long documents. Nowadays there are of course some practices which were not so important then. Colour management is whole different beast now. Now if you want to name professional but really terrible software that would be Corel Ventura.

 

 

Yep... 

 

Never heard of VivaDesigner. Claims it has been 20 years in business.. awfully well kept secret, no reviews. May be good software but PR department.. (what PR department?  :o )

 

 

 

VivaDesigner is unknown outside of Germany, I know it only because of a friend who worked with it in Berlin...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ther are 2 really feature heavy applications engineered in Germany, which I think are absolutely "first choice" under the InDesign threshhold:

VIVA Designer and the "one and only" iCalamus: https://www.icalamus.net/index.php?lan=en

 

The one-and-only was Calamus (Atari, PC) https://www.calamus.net/calamus/features_rip.php, not iCalamus (MacOS). The main idea of the (i)Calamus team is to build main application and then wait for third party software developers to make plug-ins for them. The main app is not so expencive (cca 100 EUR), but with plug-ins the PC version is 2000+ EUR. It is all-in-one app: bitmap, vector, DTP, even soft RIP [ Calamus SL owns a very save technology for output of complex publishing documents: SoftRipping®. This way Calamus prepares each single dot of each single page in your Calamus computer. Output is not controlled by external PostScript RIPs in your laser printer, typesetter or a digital RIP in China. Screen output and print output in Calamus uses the same engine (with different output hardware resolutions, of course). So Calamus offers real WYSIWYG (What you see is what you get) in the physical resolution of your output machine or even higher resolution. This garanties a new quality in production.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Calamus very well, because I worked with it for many years. Calamus was, and in many respects still is, a unbelievable piece of software. But I wrote here – and I ment it so – about iCalamus, engineered from (partially) the same team, what in my eyes is a highly sophisticated and powerful publishing application. The iCalamus team never ever has been waiting for 3rd party extensions, its a fully featured, easy to use publisher with professional intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another almost unknown layout software is Ragtime, also developed in Germany. For some reason, german companies seem to have issues with their marketing and with getting their, mostly excellent, software out there.

Another example that comes to mind is Photoline, a pro-level competitor to PhotoShop that almost nobody knows off, they also have been in business since the 1990s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here. Never heard of VivaPublisher before Oval mentioned it on this forum. Even iCalamus escaped my attention in spite of me being in the publishing business for donkeys years.

 

I have subscribed to their (VivaPublisher) newsletter, asked for more information about its Scripting engine, which pricked my ears when I read about it, and guess what, never heard from them since. So, they either don't care or have a very small team and cannot cope.

 

But I concur with what Petar is saying. I hope that the Affinity team is willing to test all these programs and make their own stamp on all these features when working on the Publisher.

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here. Never heard of VivaPublisher before Oval mentioned it on this forum. Even iCalamus escaped my attention in spite of me being in the publishing business for donkeys years.

 

I have subscribed to their (VivaPublisher) newsletter, asked for more information about its Scripting engine, which pricked my ears when I read about it, and guess what, never heard from them since. So, they either don't care or have a very small team and cannot cope.

 

But I concur with what Petar is saying. I hope that the Affinity team is willing to test all these programs and make their own stamp on all these features when working on the Publisher.

Regards

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have subscribed to their (VivaPublisher) newsletter […]

 

There is no VivaPublisher … perhaps the reason why you don’t get an answer. There was VivaPress in the 1990s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no VivaPublisher … perhaps the reason why you don’t get an answer. There was VivaPress in the 1990s.

 

Ups, I meant to say VivaDesigner.

I have subscribed to their newsletter on their website and so far didn't get anything.

I'm not complaining about it. I'm just narrating my experience.

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found PageMaker to be a horrible product. Even non layout programs like FreeHand did a better job at layout. There was on rare case where Adobe was justified in killing off a product where they usually made bad judgement in this area (LiveMotion, FreeHand, etc.)

 

 

Yes, PM was terrible. But it started years before FH and Adobe did not really refined it. FH did not have features like pagination, baseline grid, …

 

PageMaker (which I first used in v1.2 on a Mac 512KE) was not IMHO a "horrible" or "terrible" product. When Aldus first published it in the mid 1980s there was nothing else like it. I came from a Compugraphic shop where I set galleys on photo paper, which then went to the layout guy, who waxed and pasted them down on boards with non-repro-blue guidelines. Corrections were 2-line slugs that got tipped in over the typos. Photos were indicated on the boards so that they could be shot separately with appropriate cropping and sizing, then stripped into the galley negatives. The negatives were used to make plates. And THEN you could go to press.

 

PageMaker's great (and revolutionary) strength was that it integrated all those elements onto a single virtual pasteboard, and did it all with a mouse click. It was "PageMaker the Horrible" only in the sense that it went through the printing industry like an scythe and eliminated the need for many, many crafts that were part of an older established workflow.

 

What I found horrific was Adobe's purchase of Aldus, which was more an attempt to eliminate FreeHand as a competitor to the truly horrible Illustrator (I'll retract that statement only if someone can explain to me why Illustrator STILL needs at least three different anchor-point tools for editing when FreeHand could do everything with a single, intuitive tool). When the rights instead went to Macromedia, Adobe eventually gobbled them up as well, and of course killed FreeHand. 

 

Instead of suffocating PageMaker, they put it in a development-free zone while they spent several years building InDesign from scratch. They allowed PageMaker to stay on the market, essentially a mid-1990s version, so that InDesign would shine in comparison. (And I confess, I'm a daily InDesign user, and overall it does not get in my way.) When PageMaker could no longer keep up with even the mediocrity that is Microsoft Publisher, THEN it looked horrible by comparison.

 

But, I lay all that out to make this point: PageMaker excelled at source->layout integration. And, that's what APub needs to do. That's incredibly difficult to get right, because so many elements are out of your control.

 

Affinity should not release a product until it can import and output files at least as seamlessly (for its time) as PageMaker did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PageMaker the Horrible

 

Yes, just one example: the terrible drop caps feature. :(

 

Great for people who like wrong apostrophes.  ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you need a DTP application, then PagePlus is still a fine product. If you need something more professional, then InDesign is also pretty good.

 

The only problem here is - There is NO Pageplus for Mac...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If affinity Designer had a function for double pages and one could concatenate text, it would be from my point of view a super layout program.

 

Wenn Affinity Designer eine Funktion für Doppenseiten hätte und man Text verkettenn könnte, wäre es aus meiner Sicht schon ein Super Layoutprogramm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If affinity Designer had a function for double pages and one could concatenate text, it would be from my point of view a super layout program.

 

Would be a very unprofessional APu. But we would already have it. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.