Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by redlik

  1. I had a quick test of the data merge. It does work similar to the competition, with few exceptions - skip blank lines.

    But the UI for the function is so bad. There's one panel to load the csv files, then another panel for fields in completely separate section - "Fields" with all document statistics?

    No indication if the field is already placed on a page, nor how many times.

    The layout tool is a nice idea but nowhere in a help file does it say how to use it. I accidentally spotted a screenshot with layer panel showing that repeated text boxes need to be dragged inside/ under the data merge layer. Also if you select the grid with arrow, no options are visible - you have to pick data merge tool and select your grid again.

    I hope this is just a v.1 for this and it will be improved in future versions.

  2. On 3/2/2020 at 6:01 PM, musiberti said:

    Still not ready for production: Version 1.8 has no global layers and no PDF Pass Through. Extreme disappointing.

    And no footnotes, data merge, hand tool while inside text frame, table splitting between pages, no way to sample & paste text styles, import multi-page PDF in one go, and so on.... 

    I guess we'll have to wait for version 2 and give it a try again.

  3. 1 hour ago, fde101 said:

    I get that you don't like 1-bit being converted to grayscale, but I was referring specifically to the "300dpi" part of it.  I would have expected the 1-bit 1200dpi image layer to be converted to an 8-bit grayscale pixel layer at the dpi which is set for the document.

    I believe the document dpi setting would also be used for rendering the display in photo which would cause the 1200dpi image to "look like" a 300dpi one simply because of the way the display is rendered, even though it would still be stored as a 1200dpi image until rasterized to a pixel layer.

    I'll need to play with this when I get some time later on.

    1-bit image is opened in Photo as RGB, not even greyscale.

    1-bit image placed into Apub file exported is converted to RGB as well. 

  4. 16 hours ago, MikeW said:

    If I'm still in business, anyway. I've been thinking of fully retiring and trying my hand at ... enjoying life in other ways. I had to find other vendors to handle client load after my open heart surgery in 2016, and now with my stroke in June of this year that has left my dominant hand a bit useless, I've pretty much pared clients down to publishers of "easy" books and jobs I largely have automated. Those jobs I automate may never be suitable for APub anyway.

    Fair play to you for still working after stuff like that. Mighty man!

  5. 4 hours ago, MikeW said:


    However, without the ability to set different dpi in say pdf export using Affinity applications as per other applications pretty much negates 1-bit image support. 1-bit images need to be 1200 dpi or higher while other formats would typically be exported to pdf at say 300 dpi. Not being able to make pdfs with different dpi for color, grayscale and 1-bit images is just as much of a bummer.

    No support for 1-bit files is another argument this app isn't or even won't be ready to replace pro apps like ID or Quark. 

  6. On 12/12/2019 at 10:40 PM, lmarcos said:


    Why would you want to do text editing of books in Apub? I would say that I work with a word processor, LibreOffice in my case, and review the text there. Once it's reviewed and approved by author I copy it in Apub so that only previously uncatched typos need to be corrected.

    This is how book editing is done, I'm afraid. Even approved word document gets imported into layout application and given to editors or author himself they will still find corrections.

  7. 9 minutes ago, MikeW said:

    As a contractor, I need to regularly use 3 layout applications (QXP, ID & Viva Designer) and some days bounce between them all. I don't have the luxury of using a single application. Same goes somewhat for vector drawings, I often enough need to supply my illustrations/drawings to the customer in AI format. Which pretty much excludes using AD for all or part of the drawing process.

    In short, I'll never be able to use APub 100%. And I don't know if I'll ever be able to use APub for even simple novels (I do a lot of book layout).

    Yep, the 15.0.1 was a maintenance release for the most part, but the first v.15 wasn't. Important to me was the East Asian support, but there were a couple others beside those 2 you listed. However, I only rent when needed for a particular job and otherwise use CS6. At $20/month, it's pretty easy to add in the cost upon client wishes. QXP I simply keep upgrading as it is the application I use when ID is not specified, which is the majority of my work.

    For me, it's not so much the lack of features that will prevent greater adoption of APub (but it is part of the reason). Rather it is the work-flow and how certain features are implemented.

    I keep a copy of Quark and MS Publisher as we get files from clients but for my own work I prefer to have one app. You have your shortcuts, palettes, workspaces so when I design it's muscle memory doing most of the job. That's why I'm disappointed Apub is not there yet.

  8. 5 minutes ago, MikeW said:

    Not too baffling. Serif stated early on that APub would be released once it had X features to work for X number of users.

    It is a 1.x release. They didn't purchase an existing company's year's worth of coding like Adobe did for ID.

    So yep, patience is needed. 

    My worry is it will take too long for the Publisher to catch up. As many people I would love to switch 100% as it doesn't make sense to use 2 apps for the same job. But if I have to think everytime if the job is doable in Publisher in reasonable time and with features it has currently I will end up using inDesign 100% of the time and slowly forget I have it :-(

    Good thing InDesign update progress is slowing down. The last update brought "column rules" and "SVG import" - that's it - 2 features.

  9. 8 minutes ago, MikeW said:

    My figures are a bit more pessimistic as regards time taken to do concurrent work in ID/QXP vs. APub. Long books, for instance (just novels, some with/without images) are more like 3-4 times as long in APub. 400+ pages of text can become a pita at this time as revisions arrive.

    I wanted to be more diplomatic :-). It is a pity we can't make the jump now considering Affinity had a base built years ago and used in Designer and Photo. I guess they've released Publisher with features that were release-ready but the omission of so many obvious-pro feature is baffling.

    We are the early adopters so we need to be more patient I guess...

  10. 54 minutes ago, Jens Krebs said:

    @redlik While I agree that there is still a lot of things missing that other software has and all the points you list are absolutely valid, I think "not ready for pro production" is a bit harsh -- I have just sent my first 92 page product catalogue to the printers and couldn't be happier. I cannot transfer all my work to Publisher yet, but for a lot of jobs (professional work) Publisher is suited.

    I did spend a lot of time using Publisher, initially at least. I do wide variety of jobs so I wanted to really try on the whole range of different projects. The feature set we have will probably cover a lot of cases but I can see a lot of people asking for features I've mentioned. I can create 2 jobs in both InDesign and Publisher and one wouldn't tell the difference but the time spent for both will probably be 1:2 for InDesign, unfortunately. 

    Not to mention the features completely missing - footnotes, data merge.

    That's why I hope the devs will concentrate on pro features and not some gimmicks like the iPad version.

  11. 1 hour ago, Seneca said:

    I would say that Publisher is not ready for certain Pro jobs yet.

    I used Publisher to successfully layout a few books that didn't need footnotes, etc and the result was superb.

    You need to evaluate each job individually though.

    I have my own list of missing features but I can't expect them to appear all at once.

    I use GREP Styles and Nested Styles  a lot in inDesign and these together with User Defined Text Variables are things that I miss most in Publisher at the moment.

    Completely agree. I've completed a lot of smaller jobs like flyers, posters and it was a pleasure to use the app. But these were not pro jobs in my opinion. I could easily do them in Designer, Photo or even "toy" apps such swift publisher, Word etc.

    I hope we will get these "pro" features at some stage as it would be sad to see the app not sitting in my Dock open all day long.

  12. Before I start my "rant" and people will disagree/agree I'd like to admit first - I bought all 3 apps, as well as 2 Ipad versions so I fully support and appreciate what Affinity is doing but the truth is I barely use them, unfortunately.

    I hope devs read this forum and hear me out. As someone who used InDesign/Quark for the last 20 years I understand we're at version 1 and there a lot of things we didn't get yet but if the app (all 3 of them) wish to be considered as adobe killers they should at least offer similar capabilities the current version have.

    I work in a busy print house but I managed to try Publisher on couple of jobs I do regularly. First one was a health magazine, A4 16 pages. It's a mixture of articles, ads, recipes etc.

    I've finalised the mag but here's the list of stuff that made the job hard or sometimes impossible to finish:

    1. No PDF pass-through. The mag includes PDF ads sent by producers so importing them, even as external links caused the ads to be "opened" and fully editable. This is very dangerous as there were fonts missing, images loosing their transparencies etc. Had to convert most of them to tiff's
    2. Images with no frames by default. Some people may call in just an old habit but this is how I think layout app should deal with images. When I drop an image on a page I want to control the size of the frame and image inside independently. When one is laying out a page of a magazine you have only a space that text allows so I constantly resize, crop move image inside the frame to get that spot-on position. Publisher allows to do it but it's really clunky, and not on by default. On top of that when I switch this option and resize the outer frame the image inside scales and re-centers itself which drives me maaad! 
    3. No hand tool when inside the text frame. I hit the ALT key constantly to move around the page, while my cursor is inside the text frame (cant use space obviously). I know I can move around if I have 3-button mouse but it's not the same as standard hand tool.
    4. Changing selected text frame option makes it the default. Not sure why this is the default behaviour. It's very confusing and un-intuitive. 
    5. No scope for S&R. This is really huge omission, especially when we can use GREP. I use it all the time to clean up imported text (double spaces, returns, extra tabs, leading numbers). Without an option to limit to current frame or a selection this can really mess up your existing layout.

    The second job was a technical manual, lots of tables, footers, end-notes. Here's my list of missing features:

    1. No footnotes/endnotes. I'm guessing it's coming in future versions, I mean it has to.
    2. No way to split/flow tables between pages. 
    3. Tables are separate from text-frames. I know you can anchor the table inside the text frame but then we go into issue 2 - tables won't split themselves between pages.
    4. No book feature. My manual is approx. 200 pages. It's a mixture of portrait and landscape pages so my original ID project is a book, which includes all sections. This way I can have portrait and landscape as separate indd files and join them together as one PDF, with page numbers, TOC's all synchronised. This feature is a must for any longer publication I believe. I hope it's on the feature list as well.
    5. No separation/overprint preview. This is very crucial feature for pro designers. I check the breakdown of colours on the layout all the time. 
    6. Preflight/Packaging. I think that's self explanatory


    To make this post not just a list of complaint here's what i like about the app.

    1. Speed. This is ways ahead than current Adobe apps. Even on an older machine all 3 apps work as fast as I can work myself.
    2. Studio link. I like this feature, ability to edit images or vector files without leaving the app is great. I'm still not sure what happens to original files - do they get embedded or originals get edited. I guess I need to use it more often to figure out.
    3. The amount of pro features in v.1. Even though I've listed a lot above I'm still impressed how many features we got in the first release. I did manage to finish these complicated jobs with the current version so I'm really impressed and looking forward to future releases. I just wish the list of new features are more aligned to pro user than "Publisher on iPad" - nobody needs that.

    I would love to use Publisher on as many jobs as I can, now that we have indesign import coming but when I think about the features I miss I just skip and go back to indesign, which is really a bummer.

    I hope this post won't start a flame war but a good discussion how we'd like this app to go forward. I think everybody here is tired of Adobe slow apps, lack of real progress, extortionist prices for subscription and would love to drop them for Affinity apps.

  13. 4 hours ago, fde101 said:

    In most cases, it is best to use text styles in the first place for all of the text so that there is no need for this.  For most of what I have done with Publisher so far I prefer that way of working.  Instead of applying attributes directly to the text, I define a structured set of text styles and use those across the board.  For smaller, simpler things I might not have done that - but then I don't really need to copy the attributes in them very often, so this hasn't really been a problem for me.

    I recognize that sometimes you might need to work a different way and that the "format painter" type of tool can be a big time saver.  For now, Publisher does not have that feature, and I was trying to offer you a work-around that can be used in the interim until the developers reach the point of implementing such a tool.  Hoping also that they eventually do get that in there, but for myself, it isn't nearly as big of a priority as a few other things that are currently missing or ill-behaved.

    It all comes down to everybody's needs, my friend. I use styles for longer pieces such as magazines, books, menus etc. but for a quick one page jobs like flyers, poster setting up styles is not really a good solution. But thnx for suggestions anyway. 

  14. 19 hours ago, fde101 said:

    There is no direct equivalent to that tool yet, but you can achieve a similar effect as @Przemysław suggested by using a text style.

    1. Select the text that is formatted the way you want it.
    2. Click the "Create character style" button along the bottom of the Text Styles studio panel.
    3. In the "Create Character Style" window that appears, give it a meaningful name and click "OK".
    4. Select the text you want to match to that style
    5. In the Text Styles studio panel, select the style that you created in steps 2-3.

    It's very un-productive to create styles for every occasion you need to copy attributes quickly. I'm guessing you've never used the tool in real life production work.

  15. 25 minutes ago, Saint Louis Moe said:

    This is a heartbreaker of an omission. I've been copying text formatting with an Eyedropper for as long as I remember. Quark? Pagemaker? I think so.

    Creating multiple text styles for every document seems like a mess, and my first attempts to do so -- to format an imported PDF -- did not yield consistent results. In InDesign I only go to the trouble of setting up character and paragraph styles if I'm working on a very long document, or a periodical... and sometimes not even then.

    A heartbreaker.

    PS: I remember being almost giddy a couple years ago when I learned that in InDesign you could "load" the Eyedropper with a text style and then go through your document highlighting text with the Eyedropper to apply that style.



    I use that tool ALL THE TIME so it is going to be a slow down when using Publisher. I hope the developers have it on the to-do for the next release.


  16. 26 minutes ago, Alfred said:

    You’re missing that option somewhere! The ‘Save’ and ‘Save As...’ commands are for saving in the native format (or for resaving in the original format if you haven’t added any layers). For anything else, you have to use the ‘Export’ command.

    That's a bummer. The app should know if the image is made in certain way it should allow to save in different formats, not only native af... 

  17. Unless I'm missing this option somewhere I'd like to have the availability to save flat 1-layer-background image as something else then afphoto. I do a lot of cropping from scanned large sheets of photos and it would be nice to select, copy, new from clipboard and then save as widely recognised file formats for quick easy workflow.

    I know there's the export but it's just too many unnecessary steps.



  • 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.