thadeusz

@serif If you still listen and find this topic at least not too boring, PixelmatorPro just released a Motion file export option. I'd love to see that too - even I have the solution mentioned above running for now. At least on the Mac it's a good idea to have Affinity and Motion/FCPX side by side. Latest update for PixelmatorPro adds Motion support: https://www.pixelmator.com/pro/updates/ (I'm not using it and not planning, but I like this new option - and some of their AI functions)

There is a way to export shapes for Apple motion. I know, it's not After effects. But for all Motion people on a Mac, this might be a possible way. Found this on Youtube. Two little programms needed, links can be found in the description of the video.

Just a bit later.. As you are on a Mac, have a look at Apple Motion. It's not on par with Fusion or Aftereffects, but it's a very intuitive app for simple motion graphics. And there is an (awkward) way to export Affinity elements to it (another two little apps and extra 30 EUR needed, though). Just used it today and it works, but direct export to Motion is still on my wish list..

Serif hasn't even been on track for finishing their first three desktop layout/illustration apps. Maybe we let them do their work here first. Forum is full of complaints and clever ideas to improve all apps, but not much really happens. I would not want to see anything from serif in video or animation space, as they could not add anything better, I believe. By the way - if you are on a Mac, there is Apple Motion. 50 EUR and better than anything serif could put together in ten years. And there is an (awkward) way to export Affinity elements to it (another two little apps and extra 30 EUR needed, though). Just used it today and it works, but direct export to Motion is still on my wish list..

For CMYK that seems to be ok. But it is not working for any spot color. I'd consider it as another point on a very long list where we have to read "we are on it". And for a short moment you might think, ah, ok. But then you see, answer is from 2018. Or in this case Feb 2020. How time flies by these days..

Hehe, "2 years later". Maybe that answers the thread starters question. It's so sad to see Publisher, after a good but not really exciting start, to crawl around like an Apple app. I really don't understand, why someone is investing so much time and energy and is not finishing the last few steps towards a good product.

Absolutely agree. Would be great to have a button in toolbar. Another way to achieve capitalization quickly is by assigning a keyboard shortcut.

I also wanted to add my voice to this thread and complain about the double names of colors. This is not a feature, but a bug! At least, how it's implemented. If there is a wish to rename a color in a different name then what is exported, there should be a need to choose that. Otherwise - you easily make mistakes. Happened to me lately and makes you look like an idiot or someone who doesn't care. Standard should be: exported name and displayed name should be the same! Please fix color palettes!

Yes, of course. But that's not the reality you live in when working for cultural institutions. Very often it's not very good what is provided by vising artists and companies. But yes, vector would be always better, you are right. But coming back to my problem. There are two spot colors, overlapped with a white/transparent element - where the hell is CMYK coming from? This never happened to me in many years using Indesign. So I'd consider this a bug until I have at least a workaround..

This is a document which contains some of the problematic elements. test-white-elements.afpub

I know it's a little bit special, but when I'm working on documents containing two spot colors I have always CMYK traces at the borders of white/transparent elements. Use case is when using white logos on or over other spot color elements. Is there anybody who ran into that problem as well, maybe has another way to do it? Mainly I make a white layer and use logos as a greyscale mask to produce a solid white element (or white with graded transparency) - exported as a greyscale TIFF with transparency. That works well until my document reaches my print shop. As they look carefully at it, they are always complaining about these CMYK elements, which should not be there. When ignoring them, it prints well. But it always makes me look like an idiot. Is there any way to prevent that? CMYK document using Fogra29 uncoated profile

I found an issue coming from Mac OS Big Sur. Should have read about it before.. There are some issues with Type 1 Postscript fonts, as they are no longer officially supported. But they often they work, but sometimes they just disappear and are not available. Anyway - only solution will be either get rid of them or convert them into OTF.

In my case it seemed to be caused by a font cache problem, maybe from updating to Big Sur. But I'm just guessing. After resetting font caches it looks good for now.

Same problem here. Some fonts don't show up in Designer, but are ok in Publisher. In my case - Mac OS Big Sur (11.5), Designer from Apple App store, Publisher direct from serif. Please fix. Thx

Ah, ok, I was not sure. But I don't really understand why it would be useful to convert 100% black into a weird four color mix, especially when it's text or a graphic element. And one more problem - I can change this setting, but it's not staying. When I reopen this document config, it's back at convert.

One question concerning pure black and color profiles: I had a document with FOGRA39 (for coated paper) and had to change it to FOGRA29 (uncoated paper). Every style I had applied was disconnected after changing color profile. Did this happen to anybody as well? What I did: - changed my color profile in document - found out in Acrobat that all pure blacks were changed into CMYK mixed blacks, also text - I used global colors and text styles, but they didn't update the color anymore Is this just my problem?

I also ran into this issue. Thanks Joachim for the workaround on export. But - is there no way to change a spot color into a separated color in color palette? I can't believe it... but I couldn't find any option yet. I mean unchecking the spot color option would be it.

Hi Eink, even you are right with this missing feature - better check back with a few real productions before jumping on this train. At the moment there are so many small details unfinished and features missing, I can't really imagine, that a production house would be happy. Just to make clear - I've left Adobe behind (only using Acrobat for print production check). But I'm a solo designer and having not much love left for Adobe. But even then it's very often not very pleasant to work with Publishers faults and bad workflow details.

Wow, what an answer. Sorry, that you had to read a longer text which is not fitting your own opinion. Maybe I shorten this next time for you. How could I think this would be a good place to exchange opinions and perspectives. And sorry for disturbing you guys living around here. I would hope to have a possibility for bug reports without actually discussing if it is a bug or not. I'm off..

Of course I also had to think about the different behaviour of pixel (rasterized) versus image layer in Photo. And why it's ok for me there. First, working with pixels forces you to have more an eye on resolution. Very often I switch to 100% pixel view to get an idea, if the resolution of a an image (or part) is matching and holding up within a montage. But maybe It would be even here good to know, what the original resolution compared to a montage actually is (as long as it is not rasterized). Normally when producing a book I'd have an eye more on the placed resolution of images and their color space. Working on images is done separately, which doesn't mean earlier. So it's more of a collecting and a layout process. To know parameters here is crusial. Maybe this old school approach will change over time with new concepts coming in. So for me part of this problem here is, that serif is mixing up different concepts and is not very strict in separating them from each other. And to be honest, I'm not very confident, that they are very good in developing new ways of fast and fluid workflows (but still hope for it). Most new are ideas are half-baked (as mentioned: strange/inconsitent image scaling properties inside image frame - WTF? - but it looks great in the videos). By the way - when rasterizing the so called curve layer of my unintentionally (not rasterized) image - the resolution shows up again in the left upper corner. Why not before rasterizing? And why can't I switch back to image frame, when I worked on the outline? It really makes no sense in the Publisher area..

Ok, back to the problem. Let's just have a look from a more basic position. I'm in Publisher (not in photo or designer or their personas). I'm positioning an image and it doesn't have a picture frame. Why does it say "convert to curves"? I think, this is misleading, as this term is to my knowlegde used for vectors which are transformed from a reactangle (or other basic shapes) to a curve. Instead it should say "rasterize" or at least warn me if I misunderstood. If my image has an image frame, all is fine and working as expected. I know, and thank you for this perspective on it, that this is not neccesarly a bug. But for me, it's also not a strange function, but working incorrectly. I think, it's ok for me to stay here with my comment and report it as a bug.

Look, Walt, for you version 1.0 of Publisher was already perfect. I get it. I don't know, if you really try to work with it and may find some behaviours strange. I thought, it's important to write about these things, so other users might find it and can work around it. Also discussing, how users are approching certain funcions is crusial to improve these programs. It's a strange attitude, if it's at the end always just about saying it's your fault, if you don't like it. Whatever..

Come on, Walt, an image can't just disappear. In the end it's embedded. But you, of course, declare it to be gone. I mean, there might be a reason, why it's not working like that in InDesigen, right? I wrote about it already that it's a matter of concept here. Affinity has a document format which is ok with embedded, linked, rasterized and vector content and is also meant to ease out these differences between these formats for us. Mostly it's done in a good way. But I really think, there should be at least a warning and I would hope there would be a preference that makes it possible, to not rasterize, but convert to an image frame instead. Guys, maybe you are right, that it's not a bug by definition, but it felt like one to me. It's definetly a strange behaviour, which should be changed.

I'm not guessing. You just show, what I've described. Problem stays the same - and that's what this place here is for. To report and problems and possible bugs. I don't see a reason and use case, why an image should become a fill and you cannot see anymore, which resolution and color space it has. It totally disappears from ressource list. Why? Of course I also can see this as a structural problem, where a program should be more than just a typesetting program to collect referenced items and behaves maybe like an image editor. I think it's a problem, when you convert an image accidentally and there is no way back. Which means, you don't know anything about this image and can't change it's parameters in a controlled way. I'd rather prefer, it would in this case be transformed into a picture frame. All would be fine.

I think I found the problem. It might be possible, that I thought it was already a picture frame and I converted an image's outline from rectangle to curves. That makes more sense, but still it's a bit of a problem. What is the image in this case - a fill and embeded? Anyway - it disappears from the list and I can't make changes to it and I don't know it's resolution and color space. I know, it's my fault, but still can happen. Why can I do this anyway, what is it good for? It should be a picture frame automaticly, when converted to curves. And therfore the image should stay in the list.