So just for kicks I thought I would share how I design my albums and see if anyone else does it this way, or am I the only retard that wastes this much time. So after choosing images I then lay out the pages in IN DESIGN, while I'm laying out the album I'm doing retouching in Photoshop as I go. After the design is done, I make all the page spreads pfd files THEN, open them in photoshop to make high res jpegs and split the pages. I don't like template programs because all of the other photographers around me use them and I want Mine to look completly different. Ive never tried page layout in photoshop either. I don't think I would be as quick. PS quick by the way is about 12 hours.
This is what comes out!


TO SEE THIS ALBUM, <a href="http://www.johnarcara.com/slideshows/lorenalbum/" target="new">CLICK HERE</a>.

John,

Is that your TOTAL time, 12 hours, or just album time? Either way I'm thinking you could cut that in half. I know you said you don't like the template programs, but have you checked into Lumapix? I think someone earlier posted about it. It's a great program and you can get a completely custom look. Check out davidziser.com for a great deal on it.

Here's a couple of mine that I've done:

www.bentleygray.net/davisalbum

www.bentleygray.net/rhodenalbum

These only took me about 3 hours each including retouching.

I really like that layout by the way.

Bentley

Hi John,

What a beautiful album! I don't like using templates either, since I want each and every album to be unique and different. Depending on the number of images and pages, etc, it usually takes me between 4-8 hours (a reasonably simple album usually takes 3-4) per album with a really intricately designed album taking up to 30 hours. I design the entire album using photoshop. I have never used InDesign, how do you like it?

Kate

Does converted to pdf and then jpg work without any problems or loss of resolution or text/lines/colors or other elements?

thanks kate
I like indesign alot, go to Conde Naste thats what they use to layout books like Vogue and GQ I was just wondering if anyone else raelly does it like this


I think so
I save it at the highest quality pdf with no compression
when I export it as a jpeg in indesign it comes out all compressed and physically small

Hi John,

I used Indesign for my last album and did exactly the same process you did. I also was surprised Indesign didn't seem to have the control over settings when saving to Jpg, so exported to press ready pdf's and imported into Photoshop...worked fine for me.

The designers in our studio (I work in a graphic design studio during the week) use it, some still prefer Quark but the first time for me designing an album using it and I loved the complete freedom it gives!

I agree with everything you said
and as for quark vs indesign
thats another mac vs pc or nikon vs canon debate

Hum.. I never though about using indeisgn. Just curious whats the benifit if you are going to open it in ps anyway why not just design it in ps?

EL

Hey there everyone,

I too use indesign for our albums. I used to be a graphic designer so it was a natural choice. I really enjoy designing this way. It's quick and totally customizable (as you are the one creating them from scratch). I've found that once you get done a few of them they go alot quicker. I've tried doing design in photoshop, but once you've worked in indesign and have got the hang of it the difference is night and day.

My workflow is only slightly different then yours. I will lay everthing out in indesign first. Then once i'm happy with it, the photoshop work begins. I also export to hi-rez pdfs to send them to our album design company.

I'm surprised more photographers aren't using indesign. Oh well.

Talk to everyone soon.

Oh - also our design time for albums is about 4hrs.

Chris

I've just completed shooting a video on how to use InDesign as an album editor/designer. It will be available on www.newschoolphoto.com soon.

I do 80 pages in about 4 hours. I don't open them back up in photoshop, just upload the high-res PDF. Done. It appears there is a lot more power behind InDesign than what you're using in your layouts. (colors, opacity, dropshadows, photoshop effects).

Incidentally, Quark vs. InDesign is not a Canon vs. Nikon debate. Quark died after they sat on top for too long. Adobe came and ate their lunch. The transition in the design/printing world isn't complete and Quark will be out there for a while still, but there's no comparison when you're talking about flexibility and power. Not to mention you can drop in native PSD or .ai or PDF or whatever files directly into InD without having to convert like you do in Q.

InDesign is a great page layout program. Probably the best out there. I think the reason photographers don't use it more is three main reason: (1) the cost (2) the steep learning curve (3) most photographers like to stay working within PS.

As far as template programs, there are out there "T"emplate software and "t"emplate software. Some are intended as a starting points and allows you creative freedom and some are cookie cutter software.

But to use templates does not means that every album is the same. And most template software allows you to modify the layout in PS anyway so you can personalize it.

Before using Yervant's PageGallery I did all my designs from scratch. After a while i found myself saving my own templates for later reuse. So, in a way or another we all use templates. Now, with Pagegallery I have a great starting point that I tweak to personal taste in PS to make it my own.

I don't think my lab takes pfd's yet. I should let them know about it. I have been using Indesign since its initial release and photoshop since photoshop 3, however i don't claim to know alot about either. I used quark to do this stuff before InD and it rotts, your right there. I need to figure out the colors and opacity thing, drop shadows however. I wouldn't use. I don't like them and neither does my clientele. As for photoshop effects, Do you have to choose edit original and open it in photoshop or can I just do it in InD. That would help speed it up.
Also NOT going on OSP as a reward for finishing each page spread would probably help me go a little faster as well!!!


I have save a bunch of InDesign Template that I created, I think in hopes that someday my assistant will help out with the instudio tasks as well instead of just shooting. I never have really used them since I'm still creating them as I go.

Lots of photogs have it, since they bought CS2. Photoshop is the 100% wrong tool for designing albums. Albums are multi-page documents, PS can only do one page at a time. Albums are about layout, which only requires low to medium-res previews, PS can only work in full resolution. PS will multiply your time exponentially. I have the fastest Intel Mac Pro available, but I wouldn't dream of trying to lay out an album in PS. The time it would take would be crazy.

There really isn't a steep learning curve. You only need to know about 10% of the application's functionality to get an album designed well.

K

I should say, even though I probably shouldn't, that the CS3 version of InDesign will allow you to export JPEGs at any resolution you like.

Kevin,

I am really pleased to hear that the next version of indesign will allow exported jpegs in any resolution as it will a big time saver.


I feel the same about why Quark is losing out so much. They were at the top for so long but charged such a premium to buy the software and then you had to buy a load of plugins to enable you to do what Indesign does straight out of the box! I have never been a big fan of Quark anyway, Illustrator I love (I also create packaging artwork) but now I do the photography I can see Indesign being a major part of my workflow.

At the UK Mac show last year the Quark stand was noticeable buy the lack of people watching the demonstrations while there was standing room only at the Indesign demonstrations. Even heard that one of the design colleges does not teach Quark anymore...only Indesign.

I think making the jpegs in InD will help alot

If you like Illustrator, wait 'til you get your hands on CS3! This covers some of it, although not completely accurately: http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0612illustratorcs3.html

Kevin- I have CS2 but it didn't include InDesign. Are you talking about the creative suite?
I am looking forward to watching your InDesign video. I stopped using templates and started designing from scratch in PS and love the control but it certainly is taxing on my system to use full size images.

Colin,

When I say "CS2" I mean "Creative Suite 2," which is what it stands for. It's true that you can purchase items from the suite individually, and they call them "Photoshop CS2" or "InDesign CS2," but when I just say CS2, I mean the whole suite.

I think you'll love InDesign because it gives you the freedom you're digging in PS, but the speed of working with low-res and the ease of mult-page documents.

My video guy tells me we are shooting for Friday as a complete date for the vid!

k

agreed, the quark vs indesign has nothing to do with canon vs nikon, the second is personal preference and the programs is a different story.

my dad was a chief editor for a few european airways and he had always used quark xpress, which he taught me how to use, but then as i used photoshop and illustrator alot for work i decided to use indesign, and found that it does the same stuff, and is has a sort of similar base to photoshop tools and aswell bridge makes the whole flow of things work perfectly between all the adobe program suite. plus for money wise indesign working with the other adobe programs is cheaper and more practical, plus as far as i know there are plugins, and scripts for indesign as there are for photoshop and illustrator, but maybe i am mistaken on that part!

although ive only been used to making advertisement posters, adverts etc, im new to the wedding album template scene, so can anyone help me out by telling me where to find templates or places to view various designs for ideas on how to plan and layout photos for a wedding album?

plus your cool if you use indesign