Distracted

Hi, there!

As usual, there’s a lot going on right now. In addition to a huge prepress project with tight deadlines, I’ve been devoting much of my time to my other blog, Life In Lo-Fi.com. Basically, I’m moving a lot of the iPhone camera-related articles over there and focusing on design and type musings here.

The Epson 4880 proofer performed excellently for the previous job. We got great results and press check was a breeze. We were using Publication base stock and a custom profile provided by the printer. Results were close enough that the pressman had to do few moves on press day. Whew!

Our current big job will run three times as many proofs though the machine and will be on Commercial base proofing stock this time. The Commercial base is visibly brighter than the Publication base. I’ll be running to standard SWOP 2 densities throughout the project. After this job ends is when you get the full review of the 4880. Amazing machine so far!

That’s all I’ve got for now! Thanks for stopping in and I hpe to see you soon!

=M=

Apple to Allow Demo-to-Paid In-app Upgrades

According to a recent TUAW — The Unofficial Apple Weblog post, Apple will finally allow developers to distribute, in essence, trial-to-paid versions of apps. As a user, you will be able to download an app for free and pay to upgrade features or to simply upgrade to the full version from within the app. These demo-to-paid versions of apps should start hitting the App Store soon.

This is a win-win for everyone, users and developers. Try before you buy apps have been around desktop computing for ages. Currently, if a developer wanted to offer a try-before-you-buy iPhone app, under the current Apple developer guidelines, they had to offer two versions of the app — a full-blown app for sale and a “lite” version that’s either ad-supported or with fewer features. They were considered two different apps with regards to numbers and ratings. As a user, you’d have to delete one app and install another. With no easy way to share data between the versions, this often meant that you lost the app’s data during the upgrade.

Now, we’ll be able to download one app — kick the tires — and if we like it, upgrade to the full version from within the app to take advantage of the full version. Developers only have to code and maintain one version of the app. As a user, I’m excited that I finally get to take the actual app out for a spin, rather than load the lite version, try, delete, either sync or lose my data, then download again. I think this will give developers a lot more flexibility in presenting a better initial user experience when downloading, previewing, and upgrading an app.

It’ll be interesting to see how this effects sales and app ratings in real life. In the past, I’ve noticed that the trial or lite version of an app typically gets lower ratings than its full-blown sibling. This is understandable because many more people are using the lite version to try an app out. If it doesn’t meet their needs, it gets deleted and gets a lower rating. I don’t think I’ve ever given five stars to a lite app that I was about to delete after trying. I wonder what will happen to app ratings when the group of tryers is merged with the group of buyers. I wonder how this will effect the usability of the App Store rating system when shopping for an app. This is something that Apple will need to work out.

=M=

Review: Adobe Releases Photoshop.com Mobile for iPhone

Many iPhone apps have been compared to “Photoshop on the iPhone,” including Photogene and PhotoForge. Now, Adobe has released the real deal, Photoshop.com Mobile for iPhone. I like the app — it has some good features — but it isn’t what you’d expect. Adobe may have done better to brand it Photoshop Elements Mobile.

Read the complete review here at our sister site, LifeInLoFi.com

=M=
Creative Director
typeadesign.com

Arial vs. Helvetica

Arial vs. Helvetica. Fonts.com has an interesting article on the two here. It’s a brief but good read for a short background on these two famous (or infamous?) sans serif fonts.

We’ve all heard of the Arial® and Helvetica® typefaces, and have most likely used them both. Graphic designers either love or hate the designs. What’s the story behind these two polarizing typeface designs? Here’s the scoop!

Click here to read the entire article.

While I can see the differences between these two similar typefaces, I don’t believe the two typefaces are interchangeable. To me, Helvetica looks more cosmopolitan. I love the range of the entire Helvetica family, especially the Helvetica Neue family. Helvetica looks better than Arial when set with tight range kerning. With many more weights available than Arial, Helvetica offers more ways to create contrast in type, or to match the density of your type to your layout.

In contrast, as far as I know, there are three weights of Arial and then the Arial Narrow family. Much less opportunity to match the type to your layout. It’s no contest for me — Helvetica is the more attractive, more versatile typeface.

=M=