Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by michalmph

  1. Personally, I'm beyond building emotional relationships with the technology I use to get the job done 😉 We probably get the best of both worlds - gets as high-level and as low-level as practically possible, with very sane defaults considering the demographic. Technically, I think it would be nice if the default JS integration was built on top of the C api, so they would match feature-for-feature. I kinda suspect it's gonna be like that, because that means Serif doesn't need to maintain two distinct solutions. In that case, it would be nice if the JS implementation was opensourced, even retaining copyrights - the non-JS-inclined people and addon devs would get a lot of delicious and testable API usage samples. That has been a source of great confusion with Adobe ExtendScript documentation, in many areas you had to go by feel on what data types are accepted by a function, sometimes to the point of documentation being not only vague, but plain wrong.
  2. ❤️@TonyB Great news! Thank you for officially confirming this. It's a lot of reassurance for us scripting people to know it's on the horizon, even if it takes a lot of waiting. Good move on JS support IMHO, as it onboards the existing Adobe scripters with the necessary DTP expertise, and a lot of the frontend guys.
  3. I feel you, it was the same for me. The programming language question used to be a legitimate concern due to specialist availability, but I think it's been solved a few posts ago (recommendation for language-agnostic API). For some reason people still find it necessary to post their preferred languages. At least the thread gets bumped, I guess. I'm subscribed in hope that we'll get an update from Affinity about the feature, but I'm not getting my hopes up. We had a time window at work where we could have started using - or planned for - Affinity apps in the pipeline, but that's no longer the case. Now I'm just curious if the feature gets released, and if yes, will it'll bring some interesting stuff to the table that I could use personally.
  4. That post really reads like an advertisement. I think we've kinda agreed that having a language-agnostic API would best for both Serif and their users. Its risk-free, future proof, and lets users use whatever language they like. The real important question is, are we getting this feature, and if yes, when.
  5. I wrote this in another thread some time ago, I'm not against "Serif" way of doing things. If the equivalent of writing addons would provide the same features as scripting does in current Adobe pipelines, I'm all in for that. Doing things differently is good. It opens possibilities. As long as the features and the documentation allows us to mirror, migrate, or integrate with, the existing pipelines. To me, the most important aspect of scripting is not about having fancy new design features. It's about reducing the time the humans need to waste on inhumane tasks. Identifying the error-prone, manual, repetitive and labour-intensive tasks, and automating them, so no one has to do them anymore, forever - and instead focus on the more enjoyable and fulfilling parts of desktop publishing and graphical design.
  6. Do you think this could be summarized as below? 1. We need a language-agnostic scripting interface thats: - officially supported for a few main languages (AppleScript, VBA, JS - for compatibility reasons with Adobe apps, for out-of-the-box deployment and seamless integration with existing solutions) - documented well enough so we can write libraries/packages for other languages (Python, Lua, etc - means opening up to community support, maybe?) Having deployable network instances, alike Indesign Server, would be cool though. You could just push computationally intensive worktasks and batch operations to a network instance without occupying the local machine. Its orthogonal to apps acting like servers, just a thought. I think we should focus on features rather than technical means of how to achieve them. If Serif decides to implement a scripting feature, it's probably going to be dependent on the internal architecture of the apps, and long-term support by the programming team. Suggesting technical solutions of a problem is impossible without knowing the underlying constraints. Besides, this thread is 2 years old, and Serif may have already done work on it that renders this discussion invalid. Calling @Patrick Connor Is it possible for you, or anyone at Serif, to give us any updates on a scripting feature, or a current/planned functional equivalent? original post:
  7. And yet, this particular "feature" has given us a lot of awesome technologies that browsers and virtual machines use currently, which might not have happened if JS was designed well from scratch A website can currently run arbitrary code on your GPU without having it escape its sandbox. You can run interpreted code with crazy performance. And so on. All programming languages suck in one way or another. All people have preferences and opinions which languages suck more than the others. That's why discussing this is pointless. Especially that a good API should be designed as language-agnostic, and then bound to preferred languages, or enable wrapping itself to anything meaningful. Python or JS today, Haskell or Rust tomorrow, design it well once and you won' t have to do it again.
  8. Is this thread turning into a battle of which language is better, with no support for any language anywhere on the horizon? From my point of view there are two really important questions right now: 1. Is there going to be a scripting feature of any kind that lets me automate stuff and integrate Serif apps with my current Adobe pipeline? (api calls, plugins, inbuilt script editor, whatever, as long as there is documentation for it) 2. If yes, are there any estimated timelines when it becomes available? Until these are known, there's no purchase decision from me. Additionally, I don' t think that there is any point in discussing language support and approach to scripting at this stage - because of the two points above, and because it's Serif's business decision that should be based on their analysis of the market and client base, not personal preferences of a bunch of people with varying degrees of experience on an internet forum. To put it bluntly - I'd prefer to have good job security with Affinity apps scripting in my portfolio, rather than having the apps support my preferred language.
  9. Elements that exceed the artboard are not visible on bleeds. Lack of control of what appears on the bleeds means artifacts on print artwork edges when machine-cut in the printhouse. Also, most likely a bug: I'm currently doing a looping design using symbols (via this thread) and the symbols turn on and off non-deterministically when I place them outside of the artboard, aligned to the artboard's edges. Suggestion to add pre-visualization of elements outside of the artboard on toggle (for example the \ key, mentioned before - clip to canvas visibility). Process of working with a clipping mask to toggle artboard visibility in Illustrator worked well, currently with Designer it causes issues. I'm not sceptical to the feature itself, it seems useful, although requiring a completely different workflow. The way I see it is that artboards in Designer are something different than in Illustrator, and are more of a print preparation thing rather then design tools. Considering that this thread exists, could we perhaps get a workflow demonstration video that covers the expected use of artboards in context of the issues people posted here?
  10. @sfriedberg I used to render from Illustrator to smart layers in Photoshop, but I don't want workarounds anymore. I want to see the design and the intersections as I work on them. Workarounds affect the final design and waste a lot of time. That's why I wondered if there is a solution or best practice to do this in Affinity. @telemax Perfect. Thank you!
  11. How can I visualize a looping design that's to be printed on a tape? Two cases where I encounter this most often: 1. product label design, where the label is glued around a cyllindrical shape (bottle, paper tube, can) with an intersection - so that one end of the label is glued on top of the other after it's wrapped around the packaging 2. continuous tape designs for print or custom adhesive tapes Actually, I think my question is a subset of "how to generate looping patterns", but all the materials I found on this did not show any visualization tools. I end up copy-pasting the design and modifying it by eye, which is imprecise and time consuming.
  12. I'm looking to get invested into Affinity software. I love the programs so far, but scripting is a must have for me. Did we get an official decision from Serif if scripting is going to be supported in the future? If yes, any rough timelines? Most of my commercial work is DTP process automation and pre/postprocessing with Photoshop Illustrator and InDesign. I see many people posting preferences for scripting languages in this thread, so I'll give my view on it as well: - Python has huge amount of libraries for most tasks, and in recent years became supported by an increasing amount of applications. Many people learn it as their first language in the academia, and it's steadily growing in popularity in the last 15 years. (source: https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2019 and https://pypl.github.io/PYPL.html) - Javascript is the original cross-platform language supported by the Adobe ExtendScript software. A lot of people using the Affinity software for UI design and web development most likely come with it as part of their skillset. Personally, either is OK for me, with a heavy preference towards Python.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.