Cooner

I agree with this in general — if it’s a small developer and a subscription service helps keep the lights on, I’m all for it — although with a few caveats. The biggest is file portability. Most of the apps I have a subscription with are providing a service — syncing data between my devices, etc. — and if I wanted to cancel the subscription all my data could easily be exported or copy/pasted to a text file or similar. On the other hand …
One of the big problems with Adobe-style subscriptions is that even when you’re not actively using the software, you still have to keep paying for it to access your own documents. I have probably hundreds of Illustrator, InDesign, and AfterEffects documents I can’t open, or can’t open cleanly, not to mention dozens of old GoLive and Muse site designs for which the software to make changes doesn’t even exist. (And God forbid if and when I can cancel my Photoshop subscription, I’ll have thousands of files that may or may not open cleanly in Photo or other apps.) If the Affinity apps switched to a subscription model that would become a huge question in my mind about starting up any new projects with the software.
(Also, to be honest … Adobe products still have a lot more functionality, and if it became a matter of contrasting one subscription service vs. another for my professional work, I’d have to give an honest think to going back to Adobe, much as I’d be loathe to do so.)
For now I’m taking a wait-and-see approach, but I’m anxious. The other big worry for me is enshitification of the interface. I’m an independent designer, I don’t do collaboration, I don’t do in-the-cloud design work, I don’t need access to clip art or templates or generative output. A brief glance at Canva’s offerings reveal absolutely nothing I would have any use for. It would be a shame if Affinity’s interfaces got cluttered up with all that garbage. Design app UIs are complicated enough, thank you.
(Also as an independent artist I find the association with generative AI disturbing. I find it both unethical and useless for my work and certainly don’t need it gumming up my work applications.)
So, fingers crossed, I guess. But I’ll be starting to keep an eye out for options again, just in case.

Here on my Mac with my Wacom tablet, a click with the Wacom's Pen will not run a Macro in the Library. This has been noted, not too sure if it is a Wacom or a Mac or an Affinity thing.

Hi,
https://affinity.help/photo2/English.lproj/pages/Selections/selections_fromlayers.html
To create a pixel selection from layer intensity (luminosity):
Do one of the following:
On the Select menu, choose Selection from Layer Intensity. On the Layers panel, click the chosen layer's thumbnail while pressing the  OPT and  CMD keys

Yeah, fortunately out of habit I tend to keep all my resource files organized together in one folder (with subfolders of course), so it wasn't difficult to bundle all the images and stuff together for my publisher myself. However, i did have to go thru file by file and manually check which fonts I used so I could include those files as well.
Ultimately though a robust packaging feature would be a nice failsafe to make sure no resources got misplaced somewhere along the way; a final verification if you will.

This is currently working as designed.
However, i will get an improvement logged with the Developers, as it would make sense to include 'everything' in the package  

I'd just like to say thanks to the team for thoroughly implementing all of this in V2!
 
I can imagine it would be easy to come up with conspiracy theories that they added these features only to V2 to force you to upgrade, but honestly this is the one and only suite that doesn't take my money via subscription and it's really nice. On top of listening to our angry comments the team has to eat. They've done a wonderful job so far.

Which is of course the issue with how it currently works, the expectation, I assume for all of us, is that this should be the default behaviour for Save As Package... i.e., it should look through every element of the Publisher document whether embedded or linked and gather all objects and fonts into the package otherwise you effectively have to undertake the whole process largely manually ensuring you don't miss any files or fonts...

Likewise, this isn't a feature I've used on a regular basis but I do see this as a major problem. The documentation says...
With the current approach this is simply not the case and largley negates the usefullness of the Save As Package... function in its current form.

I agree. I never even noticed this problem before OP posted this thread. Probably because I usually don't need this feature anymore unlike I did in the past when collaborating with teams within Adobe's environment.
Nevertheless, I always understood this feature is meant to share a work with others, so they can continue working with it. Hence, leaving some things behind—even if it's nested assets—doesn't make much sense to me. But maybe I understand the use case for this feature wrong.

Yes.
However, the documentation for Packaging only says that it saves the images, and the fonts, used in the Publisher document. There are two problems with that description as far as it relates to this topic:
The files included are .afdesign, not image, files. Possibly "images" was a generic shorthand for files/documents included in the Publisher file. It says nothing about "nested" packaging. That is, images and/or fonts used in Affinity files within the Publisher file. So, is Packaging supposed to work for non-image files included in the document? And if so, should it also work for "nested" items (images and fonts within Affinity documents included in the Publisher file)?
We don't know.

I totally agree! The more I think about it … looking at the last Intel Mac Mini they're still selling on the Apple Store, $1099 with four Thunderbolt ports and RAM configurable up to 64GB … If they were to replace that with a new Mini with an M1 Mac Pro (or the M2 equivalent) with at least a 32GB RAM option and keep the four Thunderbolt ports and keep it in that same price range … I think that plus a monitor would be a great way to fill the current gap between the regular Mini and the Studio, both power-wise and price-wise, to suit illustrators and photo editors such as us. Of course Apple being Apple we'll see what they do. XD
Yeah for now I'm gonna hold on and wait. This past weekend I was frustrated by a hardware problem that was making me want to flip my desk and just buy a new computer, but it's been resolved now so I'm calmer. My iMac is only about 18 months old with a decent processor/RAM/SSD configuration so it should be able to last quite awhile longer while I wait and see what new options open up in the coming year or three. (I'd bought it in order to ride out the chip transition to the M1, but it seems the transition has been way smoother than we anticipated.)
Good luck if you decide to make the switch! I believe everyone should use the system they're most comfortable with but I've been an Apple user since the Apple II days and they've always served me reasonably well.

Yep, I'm with you there! I think for right now, if my machine exploded tomorrow, I could probably get an M1 Mac Mini and survive, but since my current iMac is only 18 months old with pretty good processor/RAM/SSD options installed, I'm gonna wait it out and see if they release the "dream machine" of an M1 Pro Mac Mini with 32GB RAM or some M2 equivalent over the next year or two. Let's keep our fingers crossed!  

I totally agree! The more I think about it … looking at the last Intel Mac Mini they're still selling on the Apple Store, $1099 with four Thunderbolt ports and RAM configurable up to 64GB … If they were to replace that with a new Mini with an M1 Mac Pro (or the M2 equivalent) with at least a 32GB RAM option and keep the four Thunderbolt ports and keep it in that same price range … I think that plus a monitor would be a great way to fill the current gap between the regular Mini and the Studio, both power-wise and price-wise, to suit illustrators and photo editors such as us. Of course Apple being Apple we'll see what they do. XD
Yeah for now I'm gonna hold on and wait. This past weekend I was frustrated by a hardware problem that was making me want to flip my desk and just buy a new computer, but it's been resolved now so I'm calmer. My iMac is only about 18 months old with a decent processor/RAM/SSD configuration so it should be able to last quite awhile longer while I wait and see what new options open up in the coming year or three. (I'd bought it in order to ride out the chip transition to the M1, but it seems the transition has been way smoother than we anticipated.)
Good luck if you decide to make the switch! I believe everyone should use the system they're most comfortable with but I've been an Apple user since the Apple II days and they've always served me reasonably well.

Yeah I always figured more RAM is better than less which is why I went so high. Unfortunately with the new fully integrated systems that's becoming trickier to do tho.
I do check Activity Monitor from time to time but I'll probably be doing that more frequently now that I'm thinking ahead to my next upgrade under these conditions. It is interesting and unsurprising that the Affinity apps tend to take 1-2GB of memory while Photoshop, even running idle, is currently at 15.21GB 🙄

Definitely need brush names to show at all times (as an option) and a brush search feature.

P.S. I got work to do so I killed the app … Happily recovery mode captured everything up to just before I hit XOR so it doesn't look like I lost any work. Still, tho, curious, anyone know what was going on here?
Thanks!

Ahah, perfect! Until if and when an import/export feature is implemented, I can archive copies of these files away against future calamity. Thanks again!

Walt, Carl123:
Thanks for the suggestions. For a comic book the files are all the same size (basically the entire page plus bleed); I usually just drop the images directly onto the page, but I suppose I could add a frame to the master page and then drop the images into those frames on each page. Or if I'm lazy, use the "Edit Linked" function mentioned to do them all at once at the end, which is only a minor hassle instead of a medium one. XD
That said, very often towards the back of the book I will have a few pages with text and inset images of varying sizes and positions. So I'd still suggest that some form of an "Always On Top" feature on the master pages someday would still be useful for pagination.  Anyone?
Thanks again for the help!

Hey, thanks for the input, everyone! I hadn't launched Publisher in a few days so I didn't see the new update … looks like that fixed the ellipsis problem (again). Thanks, Publisher team!
As for whether a typeset ellipsis or three periods are better, I'll leave that to y'all to hash out.

Auugh … I know this, I KNOW this, I don't know why I kept mistyping it through this entire thread … <bangs head against a convenient wall>

Aaah, great to hear, thanks! I tried searching for ellipses issues on the forum but didn’t find anything so wasn’t sure if you were aware of this. It’s an easy enough work-around for now, glad to hear it’s been taken care of!
For the record I’m really liking Publisher so far … been working on a little non-critical document to run it through its paces and see how it works. Very impressed, great work! Looking forward to the final release and, hopefully, an iPad version down the line.

Can anyone say if there are functional differences between purchasing the Affinity apps for Mac on the Mac App Store vs. purchasing a serial number online here?
I must admit I enjoy the convenience of having apps in the App Store so I can install them easily on my iMac or MacBook, or anytime I'm installing to a new upgraded machine. But I also know sometimes there are trade-offs to buying the "walled garden" version of an app.
Thank you!