Your colleagues discuss how design/layout software integrates with editorial workflow.
Q. What do you use for magazine writing and editorial workflow management, and how does that integrate with your design/layout software? We use InDesign for layout/design, and the graphic artists would like editorial to start using InCopy for editorial workflow.
A. I used this workflow with a designer using InDesign, and I found InCopy to be a very easy way to edit. It saved a lot of duplicated effort over the old flow of receiving proofs, marking them up and expecting the designer to input the changes. It also made it easy to see, for example, how much copy needed to be to cut to fit a certain space.
Jane Seiberling, communications manager, Update, American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons
A. We use InDesign in our shop for layout/design. Most of my clients prefer to edit in PDF using the commenting tool in Acrobat (requires purchased upgrade from Reader). Others type out line by line changes in Word, and I have one client who still faxes changes—whatever works best for the client.
I have never used InCopy, but I am recommending it for a particular magazine client. Our initial workflow process had them typing out pages and pages of revisions (page 12, line 3, change....etc.) EACH DRAFT! Then, to save them from typing out each edit, we came up with the idea of sending us the Word file with tracked changes—which was much easier for them.
However, it has now come to the point where each article of the magazine is re-written using tracked changes. So, on the production end, we end up reformatting each article. I think they make an ideal candidate for InCopy, and budget-permitting, it will be our new system.
I don't see much use for InCopy if your edits are very minimal. For instance, I have another client who types only one page of edits (double-spaced) in Word for each issue of a 48-page magazine; so this system is sufficient.
I would be interested in hearing how other production departments work with InDesign/InCopy on Mac vs. PC. Any glitches?
Lynn Riley, Lynn Riley Design, Inc.
A. We are in the process of moving all of our hard copy proofing to InCopy. Our outside design firm, Touch Three, uses InDesign, and we thought this would be a more efficient way to improve our production cycle.
We have started slowly, only electronically proofing two columns, but it's gone smoothly. Our IT gurus had to get the fonts talking to each other, but once that happened, we were good to go. I should mention that both shops use Macs.
I am hoping to have the whole magazine converted to electronic proofing through InCopy by the April issue. I can report back on the success (and maybe even present at the Association Media & Publishing conference in June...we submitted the idea). Anyway, my goal is to shave two weeks off the production cycle.
Kim Howard, editor in chief, ACC Docket, Association of Corporate Counsel
A. Shaving two weeks off the cycle is a very achievable goal.
We've moved a few magazines to InCopy and have seen definite improvements in the proofing process. Most importantly, edits are made one time and that's it. The opportunity for error is greatly reduced.
The fonts can be an issue from Mac to PC. You need to make sure everyone is using the same fonts, and that means OpenType versions.
One other thing we've had to be careful about is passing files back and forth between an association editor and an outside designer. Each side needs to be very careful that they are using the right version of the InCopy file—but as long as you're talking it out, this should not be a problem.
Jen Smith, creative director, Network Media Partners
A. I'd be interested to know what your IT gurus did to get the fonts talking to each other. We actually tried to move our proofing to InCopy and ran into trouble with the fonts and were never able to resolve the issue. Any help you could provide would be greatly appreciated.
Jennifer Hajigeorgiou, senior editorial manager, ISACA Journal, ISACA