dannyg9

Opening a PDF retains 99% of formatting, including individual text boxes (including linked boxes). Cutting and pasting from CS5 to Publisher, in some instances, is creating individual boxes of text for each line. I think it may depend if there are hard returns in the original InDesign file. I've found it much easier to clean up whatever shortcomings there are right now (the 100 page Magazine for example), than to reinvent the wheel. As we're still in beta mode, there will be obstacles, but the fact that it can "read" the placement and overall formatting of a "cut and paste" and pretty reliably recreate 100 pages of placement, styling, formatting and effects is pretty impressive.

With the latest Beta of Publisher, 1.7.0.133, I still have the ability to open a PDF in Publisher and have all the elements and effects intact (yes, some of the text is grouped in blocks, but that's an easy fix) and I can still copy the entire contents of an InDesign CS5 file and paste it into a new blank Publisher file with the same results (content, effects, etc.). I'm also able to open a 100 page magazine PDF file with bleeds in Publisher with only a few font replacement issues. As I refuse to subscribe to Adobe, I can't vouch that this works with any later version of InDesign.

I've been running CS5 on MacBook Pro Yosemite for some time. I've also got a late 2017 iMac which is Adobe-free. No subscribing, thank you very much. Been waiting for the Publisher Beta patiently. Has some quirks on Yosemite (expected, it is a Beta). No real problems on the iMac running High Sierra. Read through the whole thread here, and happy to say that selecting all and copying from an ID CS5 file and pasting into new Publisher file works quite well. All formatting intact, including the feathering of the background image. Importing a PDF works about the same. So far just experimenting with single pages. As some others have stated here, Publisher is LIGHT YEARS ahead of where InDesign was when it was released (I was an early convert from Quark to InDesign). And this is a Beta (did I mention that?). Can only imagine when 1.0 is released and it integrates with the rest of the Affinity line with a click of an icon. Let the naysayers call Affinity products "toys for hobbyists." I've been designing since T-Squares, Triangles, REAL paste-up, etc. and they're anything but "lite" applications. I've been producing with Photo and Designer for 2 years and they make Photoshop and Illustrator look and feel almost as antiquated as the T-Square. As for transitioning, just do it. In the Beta there's ways and means to pull in InDesign files via Copy and Paste or placing a PDF of said InDesign file. Of course larger documents will take a bit of effort and cleanup. Move forward. Don't stay stuck in the Adobe rut. They don't care about you and if you think they do, have I got a bridge for you.

I can understand the frustration. Personally I avoid subscription software and I've been using Adobe CS5 since 2010. Only hitch is keeping my MacBook Pro at Yosemite in order to have full functionality. Affinity Designer and Photo work beautifully on that so I've only had to rely on InDesign CS5. While waiting for Publisher I decided to give QuarkXpress a try and I've been using the 2017 version on the MacBook as well. I have a 2017 iMac and I run QuarkXpress 2018 and Affinity Designer and Photo on that. No Adobe products and it's blissful. You could say I've been waiting for Publisher for almost 6-7 years. The only reason I haven't upgraded my MacBook Pro is in case I need to convert an InDesign file. Publisher will be a great addition to the software arsenal without subscriptions. If you peruse the Adobe forums you'll see the defense of the Adobe universe argument being that in order to share work. . . I can understand that but my work doesn't involve that sort of collaboration. I achieve everything through PDF output, whether for proofing or print. If you can't wait or are tired of the delays, then the choices are fairly simple: Continue with the Adobe Beast, try QuarkXpress or any other page layout alternative. Complaining on a forum about what a company does or doesn't "owe" us in regards to software that is in development seems a bit bizarre. The only thing I see Affinity owing me in regards to Publisher is the actual software once I've paid for it. As a product, it doesn't exist yet. You can storm the walls of the castle all you want and shout at the top of your lungs, but it won't hasten anything. If it's not in your pocket you don't have it. If Publisher is shaping up to be as great as Photo and Designer, the wait is worth it. Just my opinion and I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone here. I've felt that frustration as well, at many companies for various reasons, especially those that kill off software for no reason.

If the Adobe story has taught us anything, it should be that we have to have options and engage them in order to have an uninterrupted work flow (Mike W seems to epitomize this). When Publisher hits (Beta or otherwise), I'll be there. I've transitioned from Photoshop and Illustrator to Photo and Designer, I've got Pixelmator, and I've been using QuarkXpress for 7 months now with no regrets. Took a while to export/import my InDesign CS5 files (some still to be converted) and I'm happy to say that I'm out of the Adobe design cycle. I use the latest CC at work because that's what they've got. The possible future of elements of the Creative Cloud can be seen firsthand in Adobe's EOL of MUSE. As many have posted here before, there's quite a bit of perfectly good software that Adobe has killed off and other programs that they've let wallow or become bloated. Pretty sure that no matter what Publisher may lack at the outset it will only go forward and become better.

If Publisher (can't believe Microsoft isn't questioning the naming) enables me to do what I do with InDesign CS5 (no clouds here), then it will be worth the investment. In the meantime, I use QuarkXpress and it's actually a pleasant relief from the Adobe product line. We should all be flexible in the tools we use as a developer can go belly-up or, like Adobe, just decide to kill a perfectly usable tool and then lock it away in a dungeon to prevent further development rather than sell it off and let the product and it's users flourish. Quark may have been super arrogant at one time, but since coming back to it I've found the company quite pleasant to deal with. And just for the record, I've never had any problems with Affinity programs.

Just a thought, and forgive me if it's already been mentioned, but with the Beta release of Mac OS Mojave, might that delay the release of Publisher? Maybe towards the end of Summer? It would make sense as Mojave is being released in the Fall and that would be playing a bit of "catch up" if Publisher didn't work on it. My two-cents conjecturing.

Hmmmm. . . If you're right, I've just save $50! I'll join you in the pub!

Adobe won't give me a discount on CC (I don't want it nor would I "subscribe" to any software) even though I have purchased at least 3 cycles of Creative Suite and still sparingly use InDesign CS 5.5. And AuthorAuthor is right. $50 US dollars is cheap. Hell, I'd even pay twice that and I'd still be saving over the Adobe monster.

abra100Pro, I'm hoping what Jan meant is that, like, QuarkXpress, it would be great if APub were able to import an IDML file. I'm sure many here do not want to face the prospect of rebuilding every file from the ground up. Perhaps Markzware will have a converter available. Maybe not the first version but soon thereafter.

I stopped upgrading at CS5. So I agree, CS5/CS6 is pretty stable. I don't really find anything earth-shattering in CC. Since I picked up QuarkXpress in November, it's been a re-learning curve with a lot of pleasant surprises. I think it's going to be the same way with APub. There are some things I miss in Quark that are part of InDesign, but nothing that can't be resolved or find a solution for, and for my personal reasons and beliefs, I won't ever subscribe to Adobe software (or any software for that matter).

I've been patient for years waiting for Publisher. I've replaced all of my Adobe programs with Affinity and Quark. I HAVE to use CC at work and if you want an example of patience, try using InDesign with it's faults and patches and shortcomings and WAIT for Adobe to fix it. I'd rather wait another year for Publisher than have to use CC for my personal use. Publisher will be amazing and confounding at the same time. I will dive head first upon it's arrival because if it behaves like it's sister programs, it will be a joy to explore, incorporate, and overcome whatever learning curve there may be (years of second-nature use of Adobe interface/shortcuts). Personally, I'd rather the developers take their time. Every time Adobe updates their CC programs, there's always wonderful new glitches and bugs. Thankfully, I'm not responsible for their shortcomings as it's what management has decided is the software of choice.

That's alright. Jut wanted to make sure that this was on the radar. As I said, it's a minor inconvenience but something that ultimately needs a permanent fix. Using Designer and Photo with minor quirks is still far better than paying a subscription, hands down.

Original Post from Dec. 2017: Wondering if anyone else is experiencing a problem with importing tiff image files created in Affinity Photo into QuarkXpress 2017. I've processed hundreds of hi res jpg images in AP, converting them from RGB to CMYK and the size to 300 dpi. Export the files as tiffs. 98% of these files are "recognized" by QuarkXpess. The 2% show as 1dpi. Kind of baffled. This workflow with AP has been fine into InDesign. Not sure what's going or if it's a QuarkXpress problem. I chose QuarkXpress a few months ago because I had to upgrade to a newer Mac and older versions of CS won't work properly on Mac OS High Sierra (Not looking for a workaround, and yes, patiently waiting for Affinity Publisher). For the time being I'm running Affinity Photo and Designer in conjunction with QuarkXpress on new Mac and have CS5 running on Yosemite on MacBook Pro (also with Affinity Photo and Designer). When I export the converted images as PDFs from AP there's no problem importing those into QuarkXpress although QuarkXpress is still showing them at a lower resolution than the files actually are. Am I missing something? Bad workflow? Barking up the wrong tree? I'm going to post this to Quark as well to see if there's an issue on their side. Mike W.'s reply: An update. The image has a set resolution of 1x1 dpi. The issue is twofold. (1) APhoto by default doesn't change the DPI metadata even if the image has the resolution changed from, in this case, the 1x1 dpi to another value unless the More button is pressed and the Embed metadata checkbox is unchecked. APhoto should change the metadata to reflect the document setting even if that setting is checked. (2) Q fails to account for the faulty metadata by using a fallback default OS resolution in such cases and doesn't allow such an image to fill a frame. Mike's workaround (unchecking Metadata box) works but that means remembering to do that. Surely that can't be the solution. Obviously there's a problem in the individual photo files' original metadata, because this is not an "across the boards" problem. I'd say 5-10% of the files I'm converting have this problem and they're from varied photographers, most likely using different cameras. Can anyone at Affinity address this issue? That is the only semi-negative issue I've experienced with Affinity Photo and Photoshop, for me, is basically a distant memory. Matthias Guenther at Quark replied on the Quark forum and couldn't replicate the problem. As I said, it's the original metadata that seems to be at fault. I'm a designer, not a programmer, but there has to be a better solution than just unchecking a button. Thanks in advance for further insight into this odd issue.

Wondering if anyone else is experiencing a problem with importing tiff image files created in Affinity Photo into QuarkXpress 2017. I've processed hundreds of hi res jpg images in AP, converting them from RGB to CMYK and the size to 300 dpi. Export the files as tiffs. 98% of these files are "recognized" by QuarkXpess. The 2% show as 1dpi. Kind of baffled. This workflow with AP has been fine into InDesign. Not sure what's going or if it's a QuarkXpress problem. I chose QuarkXpress a few months ago because I had to upgrade to a newer Mac and older versions of CS won't work properly on Mac OS High Sierra (Not looking for a workaround, and yes, patiently waiting for Affinity Publisher). For the time being I'm running Affinity Photo and Designer in conjunction with QuarkXpress on new Mac and have CS5 running on Yosemite on MacBook Pro (also with Affinity Photo and Designer). When I export the converted images as PDFs from AP there's no problem importing those into QuarkXpress although QuarkXpress is still showing them at a lower resolution than the files actually are. Am I missing something? Bad workflow? Barking up the wrong tree? I'm going to post this to Quark as well to see if there's an issue on their side.