Option B has the designer taking what might -- no offense -- be a fairly screwed up file, depending on how you want it to lool, and then needing to fix it, and THEN making templates and style sheets and proceding to the detailed layout stuff.

Yeah that was my guess.

Yeah, for my application it's the other way 'round. The designer did the template work up front, and I just glommed onto it for regular content renewal.

Yeah, for my application it's the other way 'round. The designer did the template work up front, and I just glommed onto it for regular content renewal.

But that's fairly standard for on ongoing thing, versus a one-off, IMO. I would not want to get a 200-page Quark file that an author made and then said, "I need you to make this look like I want it to look." I would lose my shit and double my regular rate (not the rate I charge the nuns), because the job just expanded in scope.

t edit Liese, did I mis-read you? I just re-read it, and it suddenly occurred to me that you might have been agreeing with me. I was up until 4:15 last night, and I am mightly fuzzy-headed.

Yup. I am, in fact agreeing with you. I'll even do it again: it is definitely standard for my ongoing thing, in contrast to what Typo needs.

And yeah, I know my file is pretty deeply wrong, but no pro looks at it at that point. They started it off for me; I change the content and print it, or render it to .pdf and email it.

Which reminds me, I need to order the replacement drum for my large format laser printer. Lines on my newsletters, oh noes!

They started it off for me; I change the content and print it, or render it to .pdf and email it.

Gotcha. Sorry for the fuzzy head. This is what I do for the nuns -- I made the template, and then for every issue they just send me new content as Word docs and jpgs and I lay them out, make a PDF of the whole thing, and send it to the printer.

BTW, will making an ugly-ass pdf version of the final book be a useful tool for a professional? On the one hand, another way to tell what I want. On the other hand not really what I want or I would not need them. So maybe it would just be asking them to read my mind and figure what parts of this I want them to imitate and what parts I don't. Better just to give written instructions?

Typo, the thing to consider is that a good creative professional should be bringing a lot more to the table than just laying things out the way you think is best. They will hopefully brings years of layout experience to the table and can help you make better decisions about how to best present your work. In the best relationships this should be a very collaborative process.

Better just to give written instructions?

Better to actually talk with them, whether in person or over the phone. Unless you know the specs you want (for example -- and this is only one component of a book design -- font, font size, leading -- for (1) body text, (2) various levels of headers, (3) footnotes, (4) references, (5) figure captions, (6) tables, (7) appendices, (8) etc.) and can delineate them very precisely in a written document that details literally everything, then a vocal conversation in real time, whether in person or over the phone or Skype or whatever, is the most efficient way to do this while minimizing confusion and frustration.

At least, that's what I would ask for if I were the designer. If someone could give me written instructions that detailed absolutely everything -- including margin/gutter/trim size; figure/table runaround; style for page numbers; style for headers/footers; content of headers/footers; style of the TOC; style of the index, etc. -- then that would give me a starting point, although I would probably still have a boatload of questions, because I never, EVER work under conditions in which the author wants me to "read [his] mind." That way lies fights, tears, recriminations, and the very strong possibility of a kill fee.

t edit At work, where we are all in the same room, the process of designing a new book from the ground up is difficult enough (granted, part of that is because half my co-workers just wave their hands vaguely and say things like "make it POP!"). And that's when they're articulating what they want, not expecting Chatty and I to read their minds based on a mock-up.

Mock-ups can help for basic elements; I'm not saying they're useless. If, for instance, you know you want every page to have a flush-left header with a rule under it that extends the width of the live area, a mock-up can show that very clearly. But an actual conversation is always going to be much better than a mock-up or incomplete instructions, or the hope of mind-reading.

NoiseD: In the abstract that makes a lot of sense. How does that translate to how I work with them? Before I start approaching professional I need to learn how to be client for this kind of work. Cause using any type of professional is a skill. If it were lawyers, my late father taught me about lawyer management. But I don't know anything about how to get the most out of working with graphic professionals.

Teppy: things like fonts and gutters are one of the areas where I would want to professional to make the decisions. I can give criteria like - no fonts or backgrounds that detract from readibability. Readibility is priority over artistry. But font is one of the decisions I want a professional to make.

Also - each 2 page layout will have three components - a graphic, a very short text, extended text. I want to reader to look at the graphic first, then the short text, then the extended text. A layout artist is the person figure out how to do that, not me.

How does that translate to how I work with them?

You need to have some sense of what you want. Not specs like font/leading, but what kind of design in terms of contemporary, traditional, minimalistic, etc. Look at books whose design you like -- though not necessarily want to copy -- and figure out what you want. Start with that.