Jump to content

dasigna

Members
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dasigna

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    THE EARTH
  1. o.k. i do know, that desktop printers always are rgb. so for cmyk-proofing colors are emulated. otherwise we wouldnt need any rip-software and expensive calibration things ... so in my case the rip acts as a postscript printer that generates its own .ps-files for printing then. normal setting is to leave color conversion up to 'printer' and not to change cmyk-values - in every application. that is fu**** easy with also fu**** great results of 99,8% accuracy. so if i understand the answer of patrick correctly - affinity simply cant do this! right? so for affinity i have to output some .pdf print file and send this to the softrip via printing though acrobat ...? rip cant handle .pdfs directly - only its own .ps files (efi_express btw.) so in my understanding it would help already if color management through affinity simply would be deactivated automatically if one set 'leave color management up to printer' ... or even if it could be deactivated manually.
  2. no? which way then? creating .pdfs and proof them, which doubles the amount of work? using a dedicated rip with calibrated printer and have to trick again - really? i have a document in cmyk. printer output should be possible with that... every other application i use can manage to print to a postscript printer and let it manage colors ... illustrator, indesign and even corel (!). in every program printer profile is then deactivated by default. works well and gives the expected results. (which then are even identical across all apps by the way...) why not affinity?? quite stunning! (if not weird)
  3. use both - but not for printing. rip is registered as a printer and creates its own .ps-files. works with every native application just completely fine - except from affinity 😕
  4. has anybody tried to proof a document with publisher? currently getting mad with this! having a dedicated rip i am trying to get an accurate proof out of affinity publisher with no effort. publisher seems not to be able to skip any color profile when printing - even when setting that colors are to be managed by printer, theres still a selection for a color profile that obviously interferes with the print and leads to wrong colors. is there ANY way to tell Publisher NOT to use any profile when printing to the rip???
  5. ... i would be glad to read this, but i fear there isnt one (convincing).
  6. basically - yes. but having it in a panel for constant view and control would be muuuch better! currently one has to click like mad just to control again... so why no dedicated panel??
  7. Hmmm ... still relevant or not? IMHO - 'color manage the print' via printer (driver) settings isnt possible at all in any satisfying way. at least as long as you're within cymk. the only way is to go over a dedicated rip and profiled paper, assumed you want to achieve correct cmyk simulation. any other attempt via standard printer driver settings is simply trial and error with no chance at all to get proper results ever. this whole thing is some science of its own and not at all simple done :)
  8. hi there, first of all - great software already. miles ahead of several other 1.x-versions in the past. joined the group of 'adobe-refugees' already in 2017 and waited long for this peace of software to get ripe. did some testing till now with several projects without daring to use it fully in production... now i did and immeadiately it gives me headaches. scenario: a brochure with about 20 pages and lots of ads. where everything that has to be done internally in APub works really well and flawlessly so far, the placing of external assets throws problems that let me question again if this is really usable for production yet ... first big trouble: embedded fonts in .pdf's! sometimes they work without hassle and the pdf looks as is expected - sometimes they dont work at all. for the latter one have to tweak every single ad to either convert the fonts or generate a bitmap out of it. thats completely weird. and to be honest: not acceptable at all. the amount of time this consumes is far too big and really can not provided at all. i dont want to have editable assets or ressources to be placed. they just should be placed - as they are. period. second big trouble: these ads come from all sources and theres no way to control what the author did/does. so the colors gives me another heavy headache! this time the issue extends to the edge of not being able to use APub for production ... colors get changed by APub!! obviously depending on the embedded (or not) color profile of the ads APub changes the colors!! what the hell? it seems, that if the embedded color profile of the ad is by chance the same as in the APub project, everything is o.k. - but for every other scenario they obviously change! why? astonishingly the colours are correct when trying to edit the ressource within APub - on leaving the edit theyre wrong again. sometimes that obviously, that the results are by far not acceptable anymore. how to explain this to a customer??? this time theres really no way to get it right - how should i change the icc profile of an external .pdf?? again going the weird way over a bitmap? whoah. just one simple question: why do ressources as pdf's have to be editable? take them as they are and simply ignore embedded profiles. // btw: i've put the same project together in ID simultaneously - no hassle at all. all ads fine, every font displayed correctly and same for colors! // so - where is that fu***ing "ignore enbedded color profiles" button in APub? where is the question-window when placing a ressource that asks for whether to simply place it or make it editable?? another thing: i am missing the ressources *panel* for constant control of missing or changed ressources. wheres the info panel to see what effective resolution a embedded ressource has, and which color profil is assigned, the original dimension etc. etc.? at this point my nerves are heavily strained and i am quite disappointed to see thats not working out. for such simple things ...! maybe someone might tell me i am doing something dead wrong, and its not APub? please.
  9. just wondering what might be the benefit of more than 2 decimals (regarding mm) in a graphics app??? (set it to 2 and just works fine btw. ...) a watchmaker might use more - but not in affinity or similars ...
  10. honestly, referring to such filesizes they wont bother me at all! getting much more interesting with bigger sizes, lets say 50 or 100kb up. more interesting what AD would do here (havent really tested yet, awaiting the promised preview-update with 1.6). so as long as the qualitys just fine some more kb are o.k. (to me). that spoken, the far more interesting part would be the files compared regarding quality (again, to me). concerning "making google speed insights happy": i dont give a damn about it as long as speaking of several tiny 5 or 10kb! :) speed insights anyway has to be treated as not very helpful more often than less. the results are regulary kind of... yes what? ... strange? as long as any website runs smooth without hassle under every condition, google might tell me whatever they want. so as long as its about 3 or 4kb for a file - forget about it. if its 10 for a 100kb file - ditto. (unless there aren't hundreds of them...) if theres a remarkable difference in quality - thats another thing. may it be possible to see what you've tested?
  11. just as remark from my side... fireworks always supplied the smallest files so far - even unmatched by ps or illustrator. (insnt used by myself anyway, as 3.5 or 3.2 kb doesnt matter to me...) but as meb said - it may not be appropriate to compare in this way as you dont handle the files directly made by AD. seems it cant handle ps-files very well due to the mentioned reasons. would be interesting whats happening to quality and size if you would build them from scratch in AD (know this is not intended and extra work, but would be interesting anyway...) :)
  12. ... reading, reading again etc. maybe that might help. seems you can follow my demands as well as you dont? so it may be pointless to you - not for me. but thats o.k. in every way. thanks for being here. :huh:
  13. ... yes thats the fun side of it at the end ;) (forgot to mention).
  14. ... thought i have done that some way up from here ... no?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. 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.