[evergreen-outreach] annual report printing
Kathy Lussier
klussier at masslnc.org
Wed Jan 3 12:51:05 EST 2018
Yeah, well, that's why I mentioned 'pitfalls' in the 2nd option because
I'm more concerned about them happening with a development version than
the stable branch. Here is how their development community describes the
release:
> As of version 1.5.1, we consider the development branch reasonably
> stable, so it can be used for serious work by users who accept that
> not all/new/features are already working perfectly. Features already
> available in the officially stable version will work/much/better in
> 1.5.1+, though.
I'm guessing idml support is one of the new features, but if importing
IDML files is one of the potential issues, I assume it would pop up as a
problem early on.
Kathy
On 01/03/2018 12:44 PM, Rogan Hamby wrote:
> I have some concerns about using a development version. Do you have a
> sense of how stable it's considered to be?
>
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org
> <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
> Thanks for sending this along Rogan. I finally had a chance to
> look at using Scribus with Rogan's files today. The development
> version of Scribus (1.5.3) seems to handle idml file whereas the
> older, 1.4.x version of Scribus did not. The file does not import
> perfectly: fonts needed to be changed and we would need to adjust
> some of the layout, but I think I could turn it into something
> workable.
>
> There are two issues to consider then:
>
> - The original reason this topic arose was because of concerns
> that the font size was small, making it difficult to read the
> annual report. Last year's report is available at
> https://evergreen-ils.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Evergreen-Annual-Report-2016-Print-Version.pdf
> <https://evergreen-ils.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Evergreen-Annual-Report-2016-Print-Version.pdf>
> if anyone wants to look at it for context. This could be addressed
> by increasing the font size in the current layout, which will
> necessarily reduce the amount of content we can include, or by
> switching to a larger booklet. However, the issue with switching
> to the larger booklet, as Rogan noted below, is that it requires a
> lot of labor time. Rogan has already put in hours to create the
> current layout, and time is valuable.
>
> - The other issue is that the current report is done in Adobe
> InDesign, which, due to cost and OS support, is not available to
> most of us. This means that the work of creating the annual report
> always falls on Rogan's shoulders. By creating it in Scribus,
> which is open source, we might be able to divide up the work so
> that two or three of us are helping to put the report together.
> Even if we didn't change the layout of the report, it might not be
> a bad idea to consider this change so that we can divide and conquer.
>
> We have a few options.
>
> - We could decide to go with the current format (with or without
> font size changes) for this year and look at moving to Scribus for
> next year's report. If we start the work in the spring, it gives
> us time to troubleshoot any issues in time for the 2018 report.
>
> - I would be willing to commit to working on transferring the file
> to Scribus and the larger size before the February meeting. This
> would give us layout to work with over February as we plug in the
> content. However, I can't guarantee that I won't find pitfalls
> along the way. If the pitfalls are too large, we would need to go
> back to the InDesign booklet, which would give Rogan less time to
> work on this year's report on his own
>
> - We could also decide to keep things as they are for now as it
> has been successful in generating a nice annual report.
>
> I'm sure there are other options we can discuss during today's
> meeting.
>
> Thanks Rogan for all of your work on this!
> Kathy
>
>
>
> On 12/29/2017 07:47 AM, Rogan Hamby wrote:
>> Another quick follow up. In looking at moving the work on the
>> annual report to Scribus Kathy and I both did some research on
>> migrating the file format. My experience has been that the print
>> layout world of software is fundamentally different in terms of
>> exchanging data between applications then graphics and this is
>> bearing out to be true. Both of us found the same set of
>> suggestions and neither are working for me in a way that would be
>> useful. The postscript export is per page not document and does
>> not export embedded data. The xml output is not parseable. I'm
>> still waiting to see if Kathy had any better luck but at this
>> point that does not look like a viable option to me.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Rogan Hamby
>> <rogan.hamby at gmail.com <mailto:rogan.hamby at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Good morning,
>>
>> There has been a little discussion off list about printing of
>> the annual report. Last year we printed 250 saddle stitched
>> trimmed to bleed with a cover at 8.25x 5.75 with 100# gloss
>> at full color. Terri, at Equinox, was kind enough to get me
>> an updated quote for this year from the same printer we used
>> last year and an estimate for increasing the book size. The
>> reason for the increase in the book size is that there have
>> been questions about increasing the font size of the report
>> without decreasing the amount of content. The only way to do
>> that is to increase the paper size.
>>
>> A new printing at last year's specifications is $985.55
>>
>> Increasing the paper size to 8.5 x 6 (which is a very small
>> increase) jumps to $1,228.60. The cost has to be considered
>> of course but it's not my greatest concern.
>>
>> While I'm very sympathetic to the access issues it's
>> necessary to point out that we have attempted to keep labor
>> time under some constraints by reusing the same basic
>> layout. Print layout software isn't quite like responsive
>> web design and you can't just tell it a new paper size and
>> have everything re-adjust. If we do go the route of a new
>> paper size we need to finalize this very soon and it will be
>> a great deal of labor to implement.
>>
>> Just to make it clear I am _not_ in favor of doing this. We
>> produce a web friendly PDF so that it can easily be scaled
>> and a limited print run for the conference. We can certainly
>> increase font sizes an average 25% but I don't think it will
>> make for an attractive product. However, I would much rather
>> do that than change the printed format of the report.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> evergreen-outreach mailing list
>> evergreen-outreach at list.evergreen-ils.org
>> <mailto:evergreen-outreach at list.evergreen-ils.org>
>> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-outreach
>> <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-outreach>
>
> --
> Kathy Lussier
> Project Coordinator
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
> (508) 343-0128 <tel:%28508%29%20343-0128>
> klussier at masslnc.org <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>
> Twitter:http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier <http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> evergreen-outreach mailing list
> evergreen-outreach at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:evergreen-outreach at list.evergreen-ils.org>
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-outreach
> <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-outreach>
>
>
--
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-outreach/attachments/20180103/bac68af1/attachment.html>
More information about the evergreen-outreach
mailing list