I’ve gotten the compile to use facing pages, and thus accessed the option for a gutter, which is great. However, I would like my editor window / page setup to mirror this so I can get the right stylization – to see how it will be when compiled at said page size and get the right line breaks and all.
How can I do this?
right now, the compile looks different than what I see, which is less than ideal.
I did find this post that recommended exporting to word or similar for this final process. But I hope that’s not still the recommended route — Scrivener has been able to do everything for me, even the tricky compile which i finally figured out. Gotta be some way to make the page setup / main editor use a gutter / facing pages!
Are you saying the only way to make it use a gutter is to not use page view at all?
That doesn’t exactly make sense…I think the question was misunderstood
I did get an answer from @Vincent_Vincent which was a decent workaround. basically using page setup to set either left or right to the desired gutter – and it won’t match but it creates the same printable space and should result in the same layout as when compiled.
if anyone is looking for the answer to this, that’s what I got!
Please do not treat Scrivener as if it were a desktop publishing program. It just isn’t. When you are at the point of perfecting individual line breaks, it’s really time to think about using a tool designed for that task. (Or hiring a professional to do it for you.)
No, actually. Unless you compile as-is afterwards. But doing so, not only do you give yourself extra work, you are not really compiling. You can’t actually use most of the features that make the compiling approach of Scrivener versatile.
My suggestion in the other thread was solely to get you a visual reference, more or less, of what it will ultimately look like. It is not reliable to the extent one should actually format (as in “final formatting”) in Scrivener.
As everyone who knows Scrivener well did or will tell you, do not format in Scrivener. Focus on the content, and then - if needed - format in a third party app designed for such afterwards. (Kewms is staff at LL, yet even she tells you to use a software other than Scrivener when it is time to focus on the final formatting, if you need it tweaked further more than what compiling is able to spit out.)
I hear that, but at the same time it has so many features in the compile intended for publishing, it doesn’t make sense to say it isn’t. either it made 0 attempt to be, but it has. and it’s done a pretty damn good job if you ask me.
I’m happy with my stylistic direction and commandeering of the tools, the line breaks are because I have a quote that’s in the middle of the page at the end of chapters, definitely don’t need a professional, I’m happy to use InDesign or Word too.
But the issue I run into with using a separate software is – say as I stylize I trim a word or two, say I catch something that could be rephrased, which of course you always will with more exposure to it — do I then come back to scrivener to constantly update the master manuscript? That’s where it gets really finicky. It makes the most sense to keep it in one project.
Any way, it has done everything for me that I’ve desired for publishing except italicizing just one part of the header, ie. Chapter title but not page number.
I’ll make a feature request for it. I assume the compile and publishing features have gotten this far from feature requests and users’ desires to keep it all in one software.
I should ask, how can it have so many features designed for compiling / publishing, but you guys don’t like to call it or use it as a DTP?
the more I thought about it, I think you were right though. It would just move the gutter to the opposite side, but the pages would fit the same words so the spacing or the positioning would be the same, except that it’s to the left or right. so the ‘layout’ ie, of the words, would be the same, just shifting to the left or right.
From my understanding, it would be reliable to the final format. I at first thought it was incorrect but the more I thought about it, I think it would be almost the same – as you said, same printable area.
I don’t think I do to be honest. It’s been great for me! I want to keep it inside Scrivener. The only thing that might push me is the ability to italicize one part of the header and not the other. it took care of everything else beautifully.
Maybe I do go on to a DTP but promise to myself not to make any changes lol.
Back in the day when someone else did the typesetting, at a certain point the author and editor had to decide that the manuscript was done, and save any further changes for the next edition. (Way back in the days of actual type, resetting a page was enormously expensive, so there were big incentives to avoid doing it.)
Regardless of the tools you use, if you’re ever going to finish the project you may find that at a certain point you have to be willing to say that the text is “good enough.”
