Fixx

Thanks for all the feedback so far it has been very helpful.
So currently the decided points are as follows;
We introduce a new parent only layer type called a Global Layer All Global Layers are added to all spreads and Master Pages All visibility and ordering is controlled globally Pages are rendered in Global Layer order across spreads and master pages Normal layers still exist but are children of Global Layers If you don't use Global Layers then they will not be shown in the Layers panel  No point really discussing the points above as they are now decided and I would like to narrow the scope of this discussion to undecided things.
So still to be decided;
What happens to existing documents Should existing Master Pages be converted into a new Linked Spread and would this feature be useful for other things Should Master Page items be visible in the Layer panel for the current spread Should we replace multiple master pages per spread with Master Pages that can inherit from other Master Pages Should Global Layers be the default for Publisher  Discuss...
 

And in those applications, users ask how they can crop the document, like they can in Photo.

I wish there was a way. I posted a request a while back: 
This routine would be a real timesaver in project that have large amount of images of equal quality (and those of differing quality can be corrected manually).

I request that PDF export More dialog box would be supplemented with optional Unsharp mask filtering part:

That would allow sharpening document images during export as batch operation. Operation flow would be then resample > sharpen > convert to CMYK, which is optimal.
Let me explain how I do this now with InDesign.
Typically I have publication with 48 pages and 55 images, which should go to press within 2 hours. And all the images are original, not photoshopped at all! How to handle this situation?
Easily. I select in InDesign menu command Zevrix>LinkOptimizer: 

And click Analyze Document, check if all files are OK, and click Process. LinkOptimizer opens all images to Photoshop, resamples them to 300 dpi, applies USM, converts to CMYK, and saves both images and ID document as copies to project folder. This happens while I drink a cup of coffee,  in about 4 minutes. After that I select Export in InDesign, upload the resulting PDF to press service website and go home early (instead of spending the night processing images by myself).
Me happy. Be like me and go home early.
Now, factually Publisher can do the very same processing in PDF export, except the sharpening part (well, InDy can too, without expensive ID add-on, except that sharpening part). Resample, sharpen, convert colours. If this part is added, you too can go home early!
I know there are people who insist that automatic processing is not going to give good enough quality. I say if source material is good enough this is qualitywise so good that it is fine 90 % of cases (I certainly fixx obvious image problems like white balance), (also if you do just fine art coffee table books this is obviously not good enough for you).
And I know there are people who do not do anything to images (like who cares, customers do not see any difference). For those this would increase print quality a lot.
I hope this can be added to PDF export without too many problems – I would guess PDF libraries are so modular that this can be fitted in easily enough.

I wish there was a way. I posted a request a while back: 
This routine would be a real timesaver in project that have large amount of images of equal quality (and those of differing quality can be corrected manually).

I request that PDF export More dialog box would be supplemented with optional Unsharp mask filtering part:

That would allow sharpening document images during export as batch operation. Operation flow would be then resample > sharpen > convert to CMYK, which is optimal.
Let me explain how I do this now with InDesign.
Typically I have publication with 48 pages and 55 images, which should go to press within 2 hours. And all the images are original, not photoshopped at all! How to handle this situation?
Easily. I select in InDesign menu command Zevrix>LinkOptimizer: 

And click Analyze Document, check if all files are OK, and click Process. LinkOptimizer opens all images to Photoshop, resamples them to 300 dpi, applies USM, converts to CMYK, and saves both images and ID document as copies to project folder. This happens while I drink a cup of coffee,  in about 4 minutes. After that I select Export in InDesign, upload the resulting PDF to press service website and go home early (instead of spending the night processing images by myself).
Me happy. Be like me and go home early.
Now, factually Publisher can do the very same processing in PDF export, except the sharpening part (well, InDy can too, without expensive ID add-on, except that sharpening part). Resample, sharpen, convert colours. If this part is added, you too can go home early!
I know there are people who insist that automatic processing is not going to give good enough quality. I say if source material is good enough this is qualitywise so good that it is fine 90 % of cases (I certainly fixx obvious image problems like white balance), (also if you do just fine art coffee table books this is obviously not good enough for you).
And I know there are people who do not do anything to images (like who cares, customers do not see any difference). For those this would increase print quality a lot.
I hope this can be added to PDF export without too many problems – I would guess PDF libraries are so modular that this can be fitted in easily enough.

I suspect that is not very politically correct feature... 

I suspect that is not very politically correct feature... 

AFAI remember XNviewMP also offers a "Tools -> Compare..." option for from it's browser selected images, those will then zoom in sync etc.

3D look for vector drawings! I would like to have such functions as in Adobe Illustrator!

Why should Publisher be able to open JPEG? Publisher is layout app.
You can sure place a JPEG file to a layout. That is what Publisher is made for, placing images and text to layout.
For some reason you CAN open JPEG to Publisher via drag&drop but I am not sure what is the use of this.

Welcome to the Serif Affinity forums.
You can set up your document to have Facing Pages, but then Export it using an Area specification of All Pages rather than the default All Spreads.

Mmmh… in artschool, silkscreen and Riso are back for some time now in the "young" ones for small press publication. And even when working with tech printing for luxury watchmakers with CMYK + 1 or 2 spots inks, the ability to add some supercrisp 1200dpi bitmap at 1-bit is still super handy, especially when you're working with trapping that let the original artworks remain crisp. So yeah, Affinity, I'm an independent graphic designer and image production tech for more than 25 years, and I truly believe 1-bit is still super useful. The recent update of Affinity Photo with some better channel option is going into the right direction but for highly efficient and professional works sadly the whole Affinity suite is not ready yet despite all the magnificent features.
It's lacking:
- the ability to work with true 1-bit bitmap, with the ability to spot colorizing
- the ability to properly assign overprints and knockouts.
- the ability create spot colours channels with transparency options in order to emulate some opaque inks like metallic ones and blend them with standard offset transparent ones.
- the ability to preview channels one by one before exporting to a PDF in order to spot some eventual problem with overprints or knockouts.
- a true Acrobat Pro PDF like software in the suite in order to check trap inks, etc.
- the ability to scripts all the app in the Suite in order to automate some crucial professional workflow.
 
Well… 7 years after I've bought the first beta of Affinity Designer, I still hope and believe you can do it. It's almost there.
 
Thanks.

It’s as simple as this:
1-bit images get processed as linework (along with everything vector.)
8-bit images get processed as continuous tone.
A RIP will render the linework data at the max resolution of the device, and the continuous tone data gets downsampled to 300dpi and halftone screened. Then everything is trapped and output.
So to answer your question: the plates would be wrong. The 1200dpi 8-bit data would get downsampled to 300dpi and added to the CT data, and the trapping would be bad based on that data.
And ”K only” doesn’t address the issue of having a 2-color job, with a scanned signature supposed to output in 1 PMS color and the body copy supposed to output in another PMS color.
Right now I’m lucky that I only have 1-color jobs and can use the PNG workaround. For a true production-worthy product, this is unacceptable.

Well that's debatable...
we do
As I have said to forum users here before you should buy the software for the features that the program already has and not the ones it doesn't
we will do our best. Affinity is not done yet.

I agree too. Everytime I switch from Adobe or any other app, I find this to be little big annoyance.
Perfectly explained. Please don't change long accepted established cross-apps behaviours.

That's not the point. Entering the crop mode while having pixel selection, should just adjust the crop area to the selection automatically. That's it.

I recall reading that the "quality" percentage means different things in different programs. It would be better to specify a maximum size for the exported file. This would seem to be more relevant to the purpose that you describe.
John

It is still good to understand that if there is upscaling [EDIt: or downscaling] involved, it can have undesired side effects. I would personally never upscale rasterize uncritically, without being able to choose the resampling algorithm:

rasterization.pdf
 
 

While I have nothing against support for higher bit depth CMYK support, I am a bit lost on its utility?
If manipulating photos, those start out in RGB (or RAW which gets converted to RGB) so better to manipulate them in RGB space before converting to CMYK for printing?
For other purposes, CMYK is generally a print format (for physical paper) and printers can't really render even the full tonal range of 8-bit per component CMYK color anyway, so the added range of CMYK would effectively be wasted, and many printers reject 16-bit CMYK files if they do happen to receive them.
 
Also, your reference to Corel Painter is rather curious, as it is strictly RGB when it comes to its painting tools (it can import/export CMYK but does not paint in CMYK internally).  If you are looking at it purely from a color depth perspective, Photo is already superior to Painter in this regard, as it supports 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit RGB, 8-bit CMYK, and more...

If you do it once a week it is ok. If you do it daily, automated footnotes would save so much time that rental might make sense.

Maybe it should be on by default.

AP Curves tool is OK but it is missing some features, like "Auto".
I would still prefer to do setting black, gray, and white points in develop module, there setting has to be done with exposure and brightness and blackpoint which are not so easy as exposure and brightness are messing each other.

I would think free transform/warp/envelope tool would help here. It is also not available but it has been asked quite insistently.

I would think free transform/warp/envelope tool would help here. It is also not available but it has been asked quite insistently.