Adobe products

[Peregrine]

I always thought of Publisher as the thing to use for logos or for ads that we would send to someone to publish in a magaine. Not really for brochures or flyers.
But you are saying it's good for that, too? I thought it would be kind of overkill for a simple brochure that we print in-house fto hand out at like a trade show. No?

[jmking]

Publisher is good for home office or home output. It can be used for mass printing purposes but I would not recommend it at all. But many still use it to save money. Often times this can back fire and end up costing the client more cash in the long run. Illustrator-Freehand is good for logos-vector art, Photos-pictures should use Photoshop-raster art, and InDesign-QuarkXpress for publishing and building pages for a professional look.

My take is if a company is selling a product, attempt to make your message look good to potential clients. Microsoft publishing software prints look amateurish. The thing of it is most people who do this think their printed brochures etc. look sweet and their egos get hurt when someone calls them on it. However, I will say I have seen pieces from Word and Publisher that looked good (exception not the rule). But they where designed and used by professional graphics people.

[DinsdalePirahna]

Originally Posted by jmking

will say I have seen pieces from Word and Publisher that looked good (exception not the rule). But they where designed and used by professional graphics people.

Yep. exception not the rule.

And as I have mentioned, I think publsiher still does not have CMYK support so even if you were converting to a pdf, your collor will still be rendered in rgb - not a good idea for offset print jobs, but if you are using a home printer you may be OK,

There are a lot of free programs that work better than publisher. Gimp, and Inkscape come to mind. Google even has a free illustrator-type program.