zkarj

This happened again, but while trying to capture the file state, I seem to have stopped the problem again. To recap: I duplicated an old .afpub file, changed the name, and edited. I exported as PDF, which included all pages (only 2 present). I closed the document. I re-opened the document and made a change. I re-exported as PDF, only the first page was exported. On noticing this in the PDF, I returned to Publisher where the document was still open. The export window showed only one page and re-exporting still only gave one page. I did a Save-as to another location then immediately exported. The window and resulting PDF had both pages. I closed Publisher and re-opened the original document. I exported and the window and output PDF contained both pages. So it seems it will be impossible to supply a file that is exhibiting this behaviour. It appears it is only happening when a document has been edited twice in the same instance of Publisher. Short of dumping the memory state of the application, I don't see how we can get to the bottom of this, but I do at least have multiple workarounds.

Thanks. I also forgot to add that I think I know what upset Publisher in the first place. I had thought right-clicking a page thumbnail in Preview and selecting Export would export just that page, but in fact it exports the whole PDF. As such, my TIFF file was a multi-page TIFF. I've had mixed results with such files in various software.

Oh, that's not the complete story. I went off and left it for a couple of hours to watch TV and do the dishes and on return, I see it has finally loaded the file, complete with all my changes, except the PNG file is not there. So I have now managed to save the file in a different (visible) folder in this form.

What Application are you using? [Designer/Photo/Publisher] Publisher 2 Are you using the latest release version? Yes, v2.2.1, I checked for updates before embarking on the work described below. Can you reproduce it? Yes. Does it happen for a new document? If not can you upload a document that shows the problem? It's a problem with an existing document. Other documents are fine. Steps taken: Opened an older, v1-created publisher document. Responded yes to convert it to v2. Did considerable work on it, including Add new pages (initially 20, later a total of 50) Pasted rich text into a text frame Linked the series of text frames across the 50 pages Applied pre-defined styles to all pasted text Added an image frame, placed an image, and added a shadow All of this went fine and I left it for open for a while. I then came back and created a new PNG file (from a PDF page, using Preview) and dragged it onto one of my added pages. Publisher then froze. The beachball appeared, but it wasn't spinning as it should, rather just 'jittering' repeatedly. I could not do anything at all with Publisher other than Force Quit it. Upon re-launching Publisher, it tried to automatically open my file and again asked if I wanted to convert it to v2. Again I allowed it. It then offered to open the Recovery File and I said yes. At this point, at the top of the window it says "Loading 1 document" but it has been saying that for 10 minutes now and nothing is actually happening. I checked Activity Monitor and Publisher is barely registering CPU usage. I can show menus, switch between palettes and the like, but the document is not appearing in any form. If I try to Quit Publisher, it complains "At least one file is currently being opened" and refuses to quit. If I again Force Quit it, then it goes through the same process again. Convert from v1, yes, open Recovery File, yes, Loading 1 document... except it just isn't. I could replicate all the work I did without too much trouble, as it was basically a simple, repetitive process, but I'd really like Publisher to sort itself out. I can't provide the file for two reasons: It has not been saved in the form it is failing to load, as it is only a Recovery File (I don't even know where that is). Even the original file is in an 'undefined' location, as the "Affinity Publisher" folder in iCloud is empty. I had to find it with Spotlight (in fact via Alfred file search) where it appears in "~/Library/Mobile Documents/iCloud~com~seriflabs~affinitypublisher 2/Documents/My Story.afpub". If I put that path in Finder's Go to folder field, it just leaves me in the iCloud folder. Oh, and the PNG file was 5.4 MB.

Annoyingly I cannot reproduce the issue currently. I did just install 2.2.1 which may have a bearing. It should rear its head next time I do a full product cycle which won't be far away. Either 2.2.1 has cured it, or there is some subtlety about the series of actions that result in the issue.

Here's a screen capture of key information about the document and what the interface shows.

I've had this issue many times in recent months. Here's my workflow. 1. Copy an existing document and rename it, both in Finder. 2. Edit the contents and save. 3. Export to "PDF Print" This gets me a 3 page PDF file — exactly what I expect. 4. Close the document. A short time later, after some proofreading of the PDF... 5. Re-open the document. 6. Make a minor edit and save. 7. Export to "PDF Print" I now get a 1 page PDF. I cannot make it output all 3 pages. The document comprises of: Page 1: Native Publisher content — multiple text frames and tables with text and some small images. All the images are embedded. Page 2: An embedded page from another Publisher 2 document. Page 3: Another embedded page from the same Publisher 2 document. While recreating the steps for this forum post, I discovered how to get it working again. 8. Select the last page. 9. Export "Current page". 10. Export "All pages". That final export does include all 3 pages. I have changed nothing about the document since step 6 so I know it's not me!

I think there may be a misunderstanding here, as I cannot get the pinned content to behave as I want. I would like the content of the placed document to be treated as if it's local text, and thus wrapped to the width of the text frame in which it is inserted. It seems that pinning lets the insertion point move with the surrounding text, but the inserted document retains its original flow. All I can do is squash it to fit, deforming the font. In other words I want one document with the wider text frame to show... The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. ...and the other document with the narrower text frame to show... The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. I.e. same font metrics, but different wrap point.

Thanks, I'll check that out!

After some searching in the help I did find that I can Place a text file, however this is not like Place for images or documents. It's more like an import as the resulting content does not show up in the resource manager, so I know it's not linked.

I have a recurring need to share content between Publisher documents which I'd like to avoid using copy and paste for. My goal is to reduce the need for rework as both types of content are fiddly to create and if an error is discovered I'd like to make the correction in one place only. I have many sets of documents which each have these relationships within them. There are two specific cases: 1. A table of six columns and up to 30 rows, including images within cells. 2. A multi-level bulleted list. Each of these things occurs as part of a separate document, but they also both need to be used together in a third document. In the case of the bulleted list, it is used in a completely different frame shape, but the table can be pretty much identical. So far I have figured out how to create the table in a margin-less document of its own which can then be placed inside the two different documents it needs to be in. There is some weirdness over the size, but I have it working. I *think* this is the best way for the table. How can I get the bulleted list content shared between the documents? Embedding a document embeds a rectangular representation of the original which will not reflow text with resizing.

I give up.

I did not say Serif would or should or that it makes financial or policy sense to offer this option. I just said it is possible and has been done by others.

That's a question of policy, not possibility. Please refer, again, to the original statement regarding impossibility.

Well if anyone chooses not to believe my *technical example* of switching a MAS license to a standalone one because the apps don't look or sound the same, that is their prerogative, but I was addressing this: It seems PixelCut have pivoted again since I purchased my license in 2018. But at that time: Fact: V2 was in the MAS. Fact: V3 was not. Fact: On enquiring about upgrade pricing I was asked to send in proof of MAS purchase. Fact: When I did, I was provided a link for upgrade pricing for a standalone V3 license. It doesn't matter if you charge 99c for Photoshop or a million bucks for an "I am rich" app, or whether you charge a one off fee or a subscription... there is a workflow that has been used in the real world that I have personally taken advantage of that is technically equivalent to what @olm asked about. Please don't make me redact bits of my email and post that as well.

Yes. They left the MAS because they could not offer upgrade pricing. I asked what my options were and they asked me to send the proof of purchase after which they sent me a code to redeem for upgrade pricing.

Other vendors do offer a workflow to achieve exactly this. I have successfully switched at least one product from the Mac App Store to a direct license by providing evidence of the Mac App Store purchase. That app was PaintCode from PixelCut. I'm sure there have been others.

Thanks @MEB. All bounding boxes are now gone. I have previously come across the concept of masks creating bounding boxes, but usually where I deliberately mask a pixel layer. It had not occurred to me that I must have painted (probably when using in-painting to remove dust and scratches). And it would not have occurred to me that a fill layer has a mask at all. Lessons learned! Now I need to go back to my earlier images and probably clean them up.

As would I if I just wanted to fix the problems, but I want to understand what happens because it will keep happening and (deleting and) recreating layers is precisely what I was trying to avoid.

Here it is. I was surprised the forum accepted such a large file. Occupational hazard with this type of software I guess. I noticed last night that the noise reduction layer has somehow gained a mask, which I guess may have occurred due to cropping on one of the photos. The noise reduction is curiously applied across the entire canvas, not just the bounding rectangle, except in a strip at the bottom of the rectangle. That now makes me wonder if the rectangle is the bounding box of any mask pixels and that clearing the mask (how do I do that?) would resolve that layer's oddity. EDIT: I figured out that Edit > Fill with white achieves this — the layer now has no mask nor bounding box. That still leaves the fill layer which absolutely affects the entire canvas and I have no idea why it is represented as a small square. ARJ_1999_UKF1_18.afphoto

Perhaps I misspoke in calling the fill layer an adjustment layer, but it was created on a rectangular image and copied between image files, none of which has ever been square, let alone that size. I figured a Fill Layer was something different than a pixel layer in that it intrinsically covered the whole canvas area at all times. And I'd rather not go deleting the layer and recreating as the whole point of copying across between images is to have a good starting point for the next image. I would like to understand why a Noise Reduction layer can have a shape where none of the other filters or adjustments do.

I've been using Affinity Photo to process some TIFF scans of negatives. Once I figured out the basic set of filters I wanted I've been copying them from one file to the next. When I began work on this photo I selected the group of adjustments from another and pasted it in. It was then that I noticed a surprising bounding box with the Move tool selected. I tracked down the culprits to these two layers. I have no idea how they got to be those shapes. The fill layer affects the entire underlying pixel layer, but I am not sure if the noise reduction one goes outside of the box shown. How on earth did these get this way, does it matter, and how to I get them back to "normal" aside from just removing and recreating those layers?

Thanks for the confirmation. It seems counterintuitive because filters such as noise reduction work on pixel sizes which, as illustrated, is going to create markedly different results depending on scale. This means Photo not a WYSIWYG editor, or at the least there should be a warning in the export window. Thanks, I think the Merge Visible is the way to go for me, as it is easily created and removed for reprocessing.

I don't think it has anything to do with zoom levels. I'm talking about exported results looking different between performing the scale in the export window or later, using the same scaling algorithm. That is the only difference between my attached examples.

I am processing large (24mpix 48-bit) TIFF files which are scans of negatives. I have applied many adjustment and filter layers: Fill (remove colour cast), noise reduction, unsharp mask, curves, vibrance, and vignette Once I have the result looking good at full size I want to export as a 1600px wide JPEG. However when I do this, the effect of noise reduction and sharpening is far too pronounced. As a comparison, I exported at full size and then loaded that JPEG back into Photo and downsized using the same algorithm and get a much smoother result. This implies Photo is downsizing the pixel layer and then applying my adjustments. Is this the case, and if so, can I get the downsize on export to apply to the fully processed, full-sized image? Attached are examples of the difference. Both downsized from 6479 pixels wide to 1600 pixels using Lanczos 3 (separable). Resized JPEG: Resized in Export window: