Dan, I don't even dispute that these ads are sometimes very crafty, artistic , have esthetic value ,great photography and ,in intervals,are even clever, and it is my own personal gripe that they are always mixed up with content and that, especially in the TV setting, they become annoying in their droning and repetitious efforts to penetrate the brains of us dumblings ,and with me they have the opposite effect. I will not buy those products. Of course this is childish. One person can't make any difference in this deluge, but it is the curse of the gnome against the goliath which allows me to do some venting, so my own soul stays in equilibrium. I sometimes have this crazy dream that some big corporations might pay out of magnanimity and only on the back page of a magazine or at the end of a show it would say in plain or fancy letters, in black or color: this product or production was helped by the generous efforts of the 'Soandso" company.And all the artistic talent and know-how could be used for valuable endeavors in the human realm, as a true expression of the artist's vision, not bound by advertising limits and correctness. Incidentally, I just last week called your office to renew my subscription for another two years. - And- since I know now you are using the Adobe in Design, I shall take a trip downtown sometime to see all this procedure in action. You guys are something else! I learned a lot in these recent exchanges. I might even try my new found knowledge and print my own brochure on "ME's philisophical Musings" as they were brought about by contributions of the group and I would make sure it would be dedicated to this group. The acknowledgments would probably take more space than the brochure itself. Marta On Sep 15, 2005, at 9:21, Dan Crutcher wrote:
> Oh, Marta, don't ever say that (about those flashy full page ads). > They are, indeed, our bread and butter, and our peanut butter and > jelly . . . and the reason why we only charge $18 for a year's > subscription. If nothing else, try to appreciate them for their > layout, photography and other esthetic values. > > As for Quark/Pagemaker, about 10 years ago our printer insisted that > we make the move from Pagemaker to Quark. Quark was much more advanced > in its ability to produce error-free Postscript files, handle trapping > (the art of turning a grid of dots into a clean-looking dividing line > where two different colors meet on a page) and do several other > behind-the-scenes processes that allowed printers to handle digital > files efficiently. > > Quark quickly became the dominant page layout program for magazines, > ad agencies and most of the publishing world. Now, Adobe InDesign > appears to be headed towards that same dominance, partly because Quark > was slow to upgrade to a usable OS X version, and because of > InDesign's built-in compatibility with other Adobe programs like > Acrobat, Distiller, Photoshop and Illustrator. Our October issue will > be the first that we've designed completely in InDesign. If all goes > well, it will be our design platform for the foreseeable future. > > Dan > > >> I am always amazed when I read Dan Crutcher, and then, when I see the >> Louisville Magazine I say to myself : How did they ever do this? ( >> Of course i could do without what is their bread and butter, those >> flashy full page ads!) > > > > | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will > | be September 27 at Pitt Academy, 6010 Preston Highway. > | The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>. > | List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu> > | List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup> | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will | be September 27 at Pitt Academy, 6010 Preston Highway. | The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>. | List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu> | List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup>
