I’ve had a strange experience happen to me a couple of times regarding corrupted files that were sent by clients.

By putting on my Sherlock Holmes hat, I came up with what I think is the solution, but I still can’t be sure I’m 100% correct.

But knowing this solution may save you, and the people you’re working with, a lot of grief.

I was working on a lift note for a sales letter package. The lift note was going to be written by a third party and include their logo (and EPS file) and the author’s signature (a TIF file).

The third party sent the files to my client and the client forwarded the files over to me, all via e-mail.

The trouble was, I couldn’t open the files. Illustrator griped that the files weren’t in a format it could read. I know Illustrator can read EPS and TIF files, so something was up. I tried opening the files in Photoshop as well, but no luck.

Well, it’s not impossible for files to get corrupted, so I contacted my client to report back to the third party that there was a problem so we could get a resend.

On the resend, again through my client, the third party said they were using Illustrator CS3 which is what I use. They said the files were fine on their end. But again, I got the same error messages when opening the files.

I started to think of workarounds… maybe they could send the files in their native Illustrator format (an AI file) or maybe send them as JPGs or PDFs just to see if those would work.

But then I had a “lightbulb over the head” moment. I asked my client to ask the third party to e-mail the files directly to me so my client wouldn’t have to forward them.

The third party did just that and the files opened on my end without a hitch.

So what was the difference?

When I got the forwarded files from my client, there were three files… the two graphic files plus a text file from some sort of automated virus checker. The text file simply said the files had been scanned and there were no problems.

But when I got the files directly from the third party, there was no anti-virus text message.

My theory is that my client had some sort of anti-virus software on their e-mail server. The third party sends an e-mail with attachments, the client’s e-mail server scans those files, then passes them on to my contact.

Had my contact saved the attachments, then started a new e-mail to me and reattached the saved files, I think we would have been fine.

Yet somehow, the process of forwarding that e-mail after the attachments had been scanned corrupted them so that I wasn’t able to open them.

It’s just a theory on my part, but I had something similar happen a long time back where there seemed to be some corruption when files were forwarded. At that time, I didn’t consider any type of anti-virus software getting in the way.

I tell you this story just in case you run into something similar. Maybe that will save you some grief and lots of back-and-forth with your client. (And this type of thing usually happens when you’re right up against a deadline.)

Note: I suspect that between an extremely heavy workload and the holidays, this will be my last post of 2008. If that’s the case, next year’s first post will be both my 100th and the second anniversary of this blog. I’ve got something in mind for that post and I’ll tell you now that your local Chamber of Commerce isn’t going to like it. It’s a topic I’ve touched on before in other places, but I’m going to expand on it in this space where I can rattle on without anyone editing me.

Not unlike the views I shared about rush fees, today’s topic is likely to tick some people off.

A question came up in a discussion forum about whether designers should give clients their source files. For example, you do the layout of a magalog. The client approves it and you send it to the printer for printing. Then, the client asks for the files used to create the magalog. That might be your InDesign or Quark files, and any Photoshop or Illustrator files.

What do you say to that request?

Surprisingly, to me at least, some designers say no. I’ve tried to figure out why they say no, but I have yet to come up with anything other than fear.

Even worse, they use this “logic” as justification: Does a restaurant give you their recipes just because you bought the meals?

This has got to be one of the most baffling reasonings I’ve ever heard. Here’s a little secret for designers… you’re not a restaurant. You’re not a mechanic either. Or a bank teller. You’re a designer. So don’t buy into this notion that what is done in some other occupation is what you’re required to do.

If you’re going to compare yourself with another occupation, you’re obligated to take it all the way. Do you only offer some design services at certain times of the day like restaurants that have different menus for lunch and dinner? Do you offer Happy Hour pricing for your services if people hire you between at certain hours of the day?

Honestly, I think any excuse for not handing over your source files to a client is, bottom line, fear. Fear that the client will take those files and use them to do future jobs without you based on your work. Fear that they’ll take those files and mess something up.

One of the joys of freelancing is not having to work with people again if they do things you don’t like. So if they take your source files and mess things up before it gets to the printer, don’t work with them again or have a clear understanding that source files are just for their archiving purposes, not to make changes.

Even worse than the “no source file” policy is when designers actually hand over the files if the client pays more to get them. So much for standing by your beliefs that source files are sacred.

Let me give you some reasons that I think you should be willing to hand over your source files.

1. With some jobs, you’ll have to give the source files to the printer. You can’t always just provide a PDF. At that point, if you’ve given the files to the printer, what is your justification for not giving them to the person who paid you to create them? Plus, your client could just get the source files directly from the printer if you’re not going to provide them.

2. There are times when the client wants you to do about 98% of the work with the rest being handled internally. Are you going to turn down jobs like that? I’ve worked on a number of projects, totaling thousands of dollars, where I’m doing the majority of work with some details handled later by an in-house design team. Wouldn’t it be silly of me to refuse to hand over the files? And it’s not a valid argument to say that it’s a different situation if you’re hired to only do part of the work.

3. I’ve worked on many projects where the original designer is no longer available or has lost the files, yet the project needs to be updated. If I don’t have the source files, I have to start from scratch. If you were in that position, wouldn’t you hope that the original designer had made the files available to the client?

4. Sometimes, last minute changes need to be made to the layout once you’ve sent them off. This happens frequently in the financial arena. You’ve done the work for some project where the numbers being quoted in the copy are time-sensitive. Right before printing, the numbers need to be changed. These changes may need to be changed by the printer or the client. How often do you think the client is going to want to work with you if you have a “no source file” policy?

5. Your time is valuable. Let’s say you do the layout of a book. A year or so later, the book needs to be reprinted with a different printer. Wouldn’t it be nice if the client could forward those files to the printer instead of contacting you, making you stop whatever projects you’re working on, dig up those files and get them sent off. A surprising amount of time can be spent revisiting past projects. (A topic I hope to tackle here on the blog in the future.)

Now there is at least one area to be aware of when it comes to handing over source files: font copyrights.

It’s generally accepted that you can send the fonts with source files to a printer. It’s not so clear-cut when it comes to sending those fonts to a client. So if you’re going to provide source files, you’ll either need to exclude the fonts, or make sure the client has the fonts you used on their own computers. You might even buy the fonts for the client and add that to the cost of the project. If there are other parts of the project that are copyrighted by a third-party, don’t ignore those copyrights.

If you’re going to have a “no source file” policy, fine. Just do yourself a favor and have a legitimate reason to give the client if they ask for the files. Please don’t embarrass yourself by responding, “Do restaurants give you the recipe just because you bought the meal?” That kind of answer appears to make sense on the surface until you dig a bit deeper and realize that the two situations aren’t the same in any way.

And if you have a reason for not providing source files that don’t translate into fear, e-mail me. I’d be happy to include your thoughts in a future article here.

I continue to be amazed (and thankful) at the quality training podcasts that are available for free.

A new one dedicated to Adobe Illustrator has surfaced called Gradient Mesh. As I write this, the podcast is only two issues old, so time will tell if this is a podcast that direct market designers will get some use out of that they can directly apply to their projects.

But as someone who has been having to spend more time in Illustrator recently, I welcome anything like this that’s going to make me more comfortable moving around in the program. (Side note: I’m seeing a Lynda.com subscription in my future very soon to get some extra training.)

Gradient Mesh is presented very professionally by Justin Seeley. It reminds me a lot of one of my favorite podcasts, The InDesigner which is a similar style in terms of solid information without what my kids call “silly business”. “Silly business” is what you see a lot of in Photoshop User TV, another great podcast, but one that I find myself fast-forwarding through a lot these days to get past the silliness and on to the tips. That type of silliness gets old quickly and, frankly, I don’t have time for it anymore. (Still, it’s free so I hate to complain too much about it.)

Justin also has a Photoshop podcast, but I have yet to check it out.

In my mind, this new Illustrator podcast fills an underserved arena. I just haven’t run across many Illustrator podcasts that are updated consistently. Of course, when people are doing these podcasts and offering them for free, you want to cut them some slack. But I’m hoping Justin steps into this void with lots of great tips and hints.

My very first computer was an Apple 2e (or ][e for those of you old enough to remember they way they wrote it out back then.) But over time, I moved over to a PC and eventually ended up working for what some people humorously refer to as The Evil Empire. (That would be Microsoft.)

As a designer, I work on both a Mac and PC, with the PC being my primary platform. Until now. As the years have gone on, I’ve grown weary of battling Windows for control of my computer. And I have a high tolerance since I’m a bit more familiar with making Windows run smoothly than the aveage user.

But as I’ve had a Mac and PC running side-by-side on my desk, I’ve noticed something: The Mac works better. There are some aspects that I don’t think are as good as a Windows machine, but those reasons are dwindling.

So, this weekend, I started migrating my files over to the Mac, including my mail. I’ve still got some projects I started on my PC that I want to finish there, but I think I’ll be starting all new projects on the Mac.

Now, I’m not telling you this just to share my personal life. There’s a design aspect you should be aware of.

When it comes to software, the main tools of the design trade (InDesign, Quark, Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, etc.) all work on both PC’s and Mac’s. And in most cases, a client doesn’t care if you’re using a PC or Mac.

But…

I’ve never had a client require a project be done on a PC, but I have had the requirement a few times that it be done on a Mac. If you’re a PC user, don’t worry. There’s still plenty of work for if you’re only using a PC. But if you’re at that stage where you can go either way, go Mac.

This is just my own experience, plus a little inside knowledge from my time as a Windows tester at Microsoft, but the Mac operating system is more stable than Windows, and it doesn’t even matter which version of Windows you want to talk about.

I’m not saying OS X (the current Mac operating system) is perfect. I am saying that, by and large, it has fewer problems and will get in your way less often.

There are some downsides to using a Mac, so in fairness I’ll raise those issues.

First, if you depend on Office like I do, the current Mac version of Office is inferior to any of the recent PC versions, especially when it comes to Entourage (the Mac version of Outlook.) While a new version of Office for the Mac is due later this year, based on a few things I’m reading, I’m not entirely confident of what we’ll get or if it will be vastly improved. I hope I’m proven wrong on that.

Second, I always advocate a back-up system in case your main system dies. PC’s are so low in price I wouldn’t be surprised to see them given away in cereal boxes if they could fit. But Mac’s are another story. They’re pricey and not something you can find easily at Costco or some discount computer store.

If you’re running your business off a Mac and it dies, how easily can you get it replaced and be up and running again? A lot of people who use PC’s actually have more than one in the house, so temporarily moving to another PC if your main one dies isn’t as big a deal.

So those are a couple of potential downsides to be aware of. I’m sure there are more. But for me, I’ve had it. I’ve been battling Windows since version 3.1. I’ve served my time. The main design software I use runs just as easily (if not better) on a Mac than it does a PC, so there’s nothing holding me to Windows except old habits. I’ll still have a PC on hand for projects that require it and for non-business software that is PC only. (And, no, I don’t intend to run Windows on my Intel Mac.)

So the next time you read a post here from me, it will have been written on a Mac and I will have cast aside the daily shackles of Windows!! (Ok, that’s no big deal and it won’t make any difference to you in how you read this blog. I was just trying to end on a dramatic note because this is a really geeky topic to be discussing.)

On the day I’m writing this, Adobe has just let the world in on what to expect with next version of the Creative Suite due toward the end of April here in the U.S.

Without a doubt, I’m upgrading. (I’m kind of a geek that way.) But I always hear this question from beginning designers: Do I need to upgrade? In other words, they’d love to get the latest and greatest, but it’s not cheap either.

I’ll cut right to the chase…you won’t stop getting jobs if you are using older versions of InDesign, Photoshop or Illustrator. So don’t feel you have to get CS3 in order to keep up with everyone else.

Having said that, if you depend on these programs, I’ve seen enough to know that each one has improvements that make life a little easier and will probably make you more efficient.

For example, InDesign has a new “multiple place” feature. In CS2, you can only place one thing at a time in a document. That’s not fun when you have a dozen or so pictures you want to put in a document. It’s just so repetitive to have to go through the process of opening and placing each file one at a time.

With the ability to place multiple items in one whack (you do have to click to place each one), you save yourself time.

That’s what I mean…nothing really earth-shattering, but with so many little improvements, your life is going to be a bit easier.

Also, for you Intel Mac folks, this version of CS3 was created to take advantage of the Intel processor. You should find it runs much smoother than CS2 does on an Intel Mac.

For you Vista folks, I’m sure everything will be fine (in fact, Adobe says it will be fine), but do some research before you buy to make sure CS3 and Vista play nicely together. Being a former software tester at Microsoft, I’ve seen it all when it comes to a brand new operating system working with brand new software.

The web design tool, GoLive, is no longer a part of the Suite, replaced by Dreamweaver. (Raise your hand if you didn’t see that coming.)

And in certain Suite configurations, Flash is now included. (There are multiple configurations for you to choose from. I’m going with CS3 Design Premium.)

I continue to stand by something I’ve said when people just starting out in design ask what software they should buy: If you buy an Adobe CS product, you basically get a complete design studio in one box. (Of course, it’s up to you to learn how to use it.) It can be pricey, but with one purchase, you’re on your way.

And, obviously, you can buy any of the software titles individually…so if you just care about InDesign, you can buy it alone.

But, again, if you’re a current Adobe software user and finances don’t allow you to upgrade, you’re going to be ok unless you run into a client who demands you use something you don’t have and I haven’t had that happen too often.

A lot of people have done great work today to provide video previews of new software in CS3. I’m going to point you to those if you want to learn more.

First, for an overview, head over to the Adobe website.

Adobe Creative Suite Podcast – This is primarily a slide show overview the whole Suite, but also includes some video demos. (Watch the 3D stuff in Photoshop and Live Color in Illustrator. Waaaay cooool!)

InDesign Secrets Podcast – New features in InDesign (audio)

The InDesigner – New features in InDesign (video)

Photoshop CS3 Learning Center – Lots of videos showing off the new Photoshop

Real World Illustrator Podcast – New features in Illustrator

Total Training Videos – Despite being pricey, hands-down the best professional video training you can buy.

I’ve spent a lot of time recently looking at websites of freelancers…not just freelance designers and copywriters, but freelancers of all types.

Over time, I’ll share various thoughts, but I’ll just focus on one area today. This one is kind of specific to designers and copywriters. It may be a bit controversial, but just take it as one person’s opinion. (I guess it’s only controversial if you disagree with me.)

It’s not uncommon for a freelancer to list clients he or she has worked for. I don’t, for no reason in particular. But I have nothing against other people listing their clients on their website.

But that’s where we run into potential problems. How do you define a client? You’d think that would be easy enough, but not quite.

I’ve seen some beginners list companies they’ve done spec assignments for as clients. This is a gray area, but I don’t believe that just because you did a spec assignment for someone, that qualifies them as a client.

If that were the case, and I wanted to create an impressive list of “clients”, I could do a bunch of unsolicited spec assignments for Microsoft, Boeing, Ford and any other well-known name you could think of. I could even send my work off to those companies. Whether or not I got a job from them, or even a response, wouldn’t matter much because my main goal would be to list them as “clients.”

Does it make a difference if the company was actively soliciting for spec assignments? In my mind, it doesn’t.

Here’s how I define a client for my business: An individual or company that uses a design or layout I have created.

Notice there’s nothing in there about being paid. Although all my jobs are paid, my only criteria for being considered a client is if they used something I created based on their request for my services.

So what’s the big deal of listing spec work as “client” work? To me, it’s an issue of trust. As I’ve said before, the difference between you getting a job and not getting a job is often due to very minor, subtle things. And part of your job is to eliminate as many “red flag” items as possible.

I think, and this is just my opinion, that most potential clients interpret client lists as people you’ve done actual work for and that the work has been used.

If they ask you to provide details about your relationship with the clients on your list or about the projects you worked on for them (perhaps the potential client knows some of the people you’ve listed), you might find yourself in an uncomfortable position having to explain the true nature of your relationship with the names on your client list.

That could be enough to send the potential client to someone else. Never underestimate the importance of clients feeling they can trust what you say and do. Those initial feelings they get about you often seal the deal, for better or worse.

You might be asking, “So how do I catch someone’s eye if I’m not using recognizable names?” Simple…stick with samples that show the quality of your work. Highlight the fact that you know how to use your design tools by showing samples that make it clear. Focus your attention on a compelling message on your homepage that helps convince people to at least contact you for more information or to look at your samples.

While I’m against listing spec jobs as “clients”, I think it’s fine to show on your website the work you did on spec or the work you’ve made up. (As long as your samples page doesn’t say “This is work I’ve done for clients.”) That’s because you used your tools and skills to create it, whether anyone used it or not. And that’s the main thing clients want to know…whether you have the skills to do the job.

If you get asked about whether your samples are made-up or spec, or if they were for jobs in which you got paid, be honest and tell them. That helps you build trust.

I think the bottom line to all this is that you seriously consider the impression you’re giving people when they visit your website. You need to question how you phrase everything you say on your site and whether what you’ve included on your site is helping or hurting you.

You want to be completely confident that your site is the truest representation of you, your skills, and the way you do business.

—–

Forgot to mention that the first issue of the new Adobe Magazine is out. (It’s a free digital magazine.) Boy, was I disappointed! I was hoping that the magazine would be full of great tips on how to use Adobe software like InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator. After all, who better than Adobe would know how to squeeze the most out of their software?

No such luck. There are some tips, but it feels more like a bunch of stories about companies and people who use Adobe software…almost like case studies. The magazine is free, so I suppose I shouldn’t complain, but I was so disappointed. For tips about getting the most out of Adobe software, stick with Layers Magazine or some publication that is specific to the Adobe software you use.