Raphie

Question, this still happens if you turn off the background layer from the Export Persona?

Yes, what I did is to raster the groups with too many effects that are not supported by the PDF standards and that fix the issue. Downside is that I have to keep two copies of the same document. One with editable capabilities and one for processing the PDF. But that's way better workflow than the one I had before with Adobe products.

I forgot to come to this post to say thank you for tackling this quickly. I was able to present the final product, and everything looks amazing. Thank you.

Yes, this needs to be added. It is a very important feature. Especially when working with big companies with lots of products, which constantly are changing based in customer feedback as this one. Today I needed to revise a table for a product comparison list, but I needed to add a row over the top row, which is not possible with the current features in the table tools. If the row needed to be added in before a row in the middle is no issue, you just add the row selecting the row above it. But not with the top row. Hope this makes sense.

This was not an issue on 2.0, just appeared after the 2.1 update was installed. The image below shows a PDF I exported before the update. When I opened the file to apply reviews on the document, I'd noticed that all brands that should include a non-breaking hyphen had a non-breaking space instead. And even when I tried to apply the hyphen back, it just doesn't work anymore. Hope this could be a quick fixed or I have to installed 2.0 back again. I need this project done today or tomorrow.

Hope this is recoverable amber-sky.afphoto

Affinity Publisher 1.10.4.1198 (Not Store Version) on Windows 10: Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-9940X CPU @ 3.30GHz 3.31 GHz Installed RAM 64.0 GB (63.7 GB usable) System type 64-bit operating system, x64-based processor Problem When exporting document, bleeds are set same throughout the document. When exporting some pages are still cropped at page size. Same pages show as raster images instead as text and graphic. I'm including the PDF document, can't use it for printing, is a complete mess and I couldn't find a way to fix this on the forum or even by searching for solutions. On the document notice page 13, 14, 27, 28, 31 and 32. Page 5 blending mode is not properly calculated for the PDF when bleed and crop marks are applied What I have tried many times Check bleed for all pages not just the current page. Set it to specified size and applied it. This did not work. Have rasterized master elements as single flat rasterized object to see if any conflicting process is causing the issue. Did not work either. I have followed procedures for similar issues previously encountered with InDesing, for example, moving all text frames to the top layers this way they are not affected by graphic effects, forcing the text to be rasterized. This did not fix the issue either. And if it would fix the text rasterization issue this does not explain why the pages in question are being cropped at page size ignoring completely the "include bleed" request. Rasterized all images with live filter layers applied on Photo Persona, ex. Unsharp Mask. This did work with the rasterizing issue and the cropped to page size situation. Solutions that worked Forced rasterized full pages: If you have applied effects on the Photo Persona and you do want to keep the original without destructively applied the filters, copy and paste the files to a Photo file and save it, then rasterize your image with filters. Blending mode issue: Same issue as with Photo Personal live filters, even if is a basic effect is applied, as Outer Shadow, the blending mode do not render properly. NOTE: I didn't rasterize all the images with effects in the document, only on the pages with the issues, there are images with effects in the other pages so not sure what cause the issue. My assumption is that mostly the Live Effects introduced on Photo might be causing some conflicts, but again that's speculation. Conclusion As many of you, I'm a multi-task agent where I work, graphic design is one of my many hats. But as a developer as well I would suggest to have any kind of prompt or process that alert the user or the PDF rendering engine: As a prompt: For users that use the Photo and Designer Persona frequently, when sending the document to export, prompt these users alerting those effects applied in different Personas can cause the pages to be completely rasterize to honor effects, then allowing the user to choose either to continue or to go back and raster all images with special filters. As a pre-export process: Prompt user that images with live filters and effects may affect how PDF is rendered, especially for legacy PDF-X formatting, and that the images will be temporarily rasterized with the effects but that the process will take longer and could cause memory issues. The process obviously will need to be prioritized over other running process. If this is even possible, since should be a temporary process that need to be reverted once the export is done. Another suggestion is to add an option that forces to keep text readable instead of forcing the whole page to be rasterized, meaning, rasterizing anything that's not text and maintaining text integrity in a top layer over the rasterized background. Attached File Descriptions The file with the flag OP (Offset Printing) is the one with all the issues. The file with the flag OP-Rasterized-Effects is the one with all the solutions applied P17D673R1__US__EN__Head-Solutions-Brochure.OP.pdf P17D673R1__US__EN__Head-Solutions-Brochure.OP-Rasterized-Effects.pdf

Hello, I have bought all versions available for Affinity to use with my different devices and I love the new feature to connect and download items bought on your store inside the applications. This works perfectly on the downloadable Windows and iPad versions, but not with the Microsoft Store version. I had tried on any of the applications but none of them works it shows me a try again prompt. Same in either application, Publisher, Photo or Designer.

Is very impressive that there are designers that do not understand that tools for designers need to cover all designers, not only web developers or newbies that know about icons through a favicon web search. Icons are still widely used in many instances and is a profitable business. I find hilarious when people says the new way is better because is new, but the new way is more tedious than the old *.ico file... one file carries all the sizes you added to it, with inherit adaptability to size request. Every time you submit a power web app, you have to upload dozens of images to do what a single upload would accomplish on an *.ico file. Same on the Apple Store or Google Android Apps, which is ridiculous. That process would be simpler and lighter with probably a new WebM icon file. But since does not exists, haven't done due research to be absolutely sure, you have to upload either one by one or on a compress file. And if you make a change then you have to do the whole process to produce the same list back again. Very ridiculous again in my opinion. Is that the new way you referring to? I'm not sold. Anyway... Other Possible Solutions You can use Gimp2 to create icons too. Open source and downloadable tool with pretty other nice tools that you won't find either in Affinity Photo or Photoshop without plugins... for example, exporting *.ico files and creating Normal Maps... among others. The way Gimp handle it, you start by creating your 256px (like in old days) or larger icon size 512px, and scale that down per layer, and if a layer start looking blurry then you can import your small version or even create them in the same file. Once you have all the sizes you want to cover, Export your layered Gimp file as an *.ico file. Is that easy. Gimp even has an icon previewer if I'm not mistaken, don't quote me on this. Also, Inkscape has an icon generator integrated. Another open source vector base application, with an icon previewer as well.

That's simple, because for the rare occasions that you required to export DXF files or bitmap tracing, worth saving over $700 per year on subscription alone. I believe Affinity Designer will have this in the future, in the meantime, the time I spend exporting to another application is less expensive than a subscription. Even if you charge premium for your time. NOW TO BE FAIR If you constantly required to export DXF files would be obvious that Illustrator is your best option. There are many things Illustrator has that I do miss, like the 3D tools. If your workflow depends on these then is obvious that you will have to invest annually or monthly in an Adobe subscription. As an career Illustrator, there are things that I consider are essential for me and I can say for sure, Affinity Designers along with Publisher and Photo has become an essential tool. The simple fact that by opening Affinity Publisher to generate content give me the liberty of not having to have Photo and Designer running, since I can change to each of it's tools from inside Publisher, that's a big time saving for me. This pair with the other fact that I can save a project on my OneDrive and then open it on my iPad, even if it is not a Publisher file, I can still keep working on this project on Designer for iPad, then come back to Publisher all with the same file. Try do that with InDesign. Your case might be different, but as an long time Illustrator, Designer, in my opinion, is way superior than Illustrator.

Just adding other options. You can also export as SVG, then go to https://Inkscape.org and install this free vector editor, it has the option to Save As (not export) DXF file, which is label in the list as Desktop Cutter Plotter (AutoCAD DXF file) *.dxf The advantage of using this application is that has other tools that are lacking for the moment in Affinity Designer. Affinity Designer is my main Vector Graphic editor in my work flow, but for example, there are many things I love to do hand drawn, since it give a nostalgic touch for certain projects, and Affinity lacks a way to trace bitmaps. Inkscape, in my opinion, has one of the best bitmap tracing engine implemented in the application, is a little buggy and takes sometime to get used to it, but once you master it is the best, again in my opinion. For these rare occasions that Affinity Designer let me down, I can manage by opening Inkscape. It's been around for many years, so I can say with certainty that is secure and amazing tool. Even when I used Adobe Illustrator in the past, Inkscape was my go to for many other stuff. Today I mostly use Affinity Designer, which I love. But again, Inkscape comes to the rescue from time to time.

This would be awesome, but I would add to have the ability to use JavaScript for custom business logic for order forms. If you guys can standardize a JavaScript for multiple readers would be perfect. I know this is an Utopia type of dream.

This is really a bad solution, a proper packager should be in place, especially if Affinity Publisher still need to maintain the images embedded to preview, even if it says they are linked. And as you point out this works with a fairly large file, almost a Gigabyte. But I wonder how this going to behave with even larger files. Photoshop itself won't handle properly over 5 Gb, I always test to see how far I can go with a software since the computer is more than capable that kind of file size in memory. The funny thing is that even Microsoft Publisher, the most basic publication application has this feature. Not to have a proper packager is a huge mistake, the reason you create publications is mostly to send to print, most digital printers are OK with a PDF file but most reputable printers prefer to have the original file. They are dealing with thousands of prints per day and their schedule is tight as Air Control on an Airport, a small delay because of an error on a PDF can cost millions of dollars in delays, with the original file they can make adjustments on the fly. And I don't know if any young freelance know this, fonts are software and many printers do not have the time to update their font catalog, because they probably have the font in the system doesn't mean is the same font, and what they look in the screen is nothing close to what you see in your screen. And the PDF will used the font installed in the system is currently open, fonts are not saved with the document. Try to print a PDF file from the web that uses licensed fonts and you will see what I mean by this. Of course, this is only one variable from the many could go wrong when moving a design to another computer on an alien network. And this is very true, if you have been in the business for as long idyguy, I'm almost getting there, not any reputable firm will take seriously Affinity Publisher without this feature. This should be your higher priority. Right now I have to have a meeting and back up everything I suggested to my agency of considering Affinity Publisher as a replacement for InDesign, it is that serious.

Vote for this option too. Would be great if it could have an option for embeddable template blocks to create order forms. For example, section one in an order form use a column style with product thumbnail and data, then section 2 will use a list/table style [Column A - checkbox] [Column B - Quantity Textbox] [Column C - Part Number] [Column D - Product Description] [Column E - Pricing] ... and so on. So each block should be able to be set up by: Template URL, Data File and Image Directory.

You are correct, my recommended suggestion is the IP address. Since the unprecedented lockdown caused by the current pandemic (year 2020) we had to deal with multiple users that has mapped their network based on their personal devices, where some drive mapping conflicted with the mapping of the drives in-office. Because of this we found it is better to use the IP addresses for the machines. The reason for this is that our IT department uses a system called Hamachi from LogMeIn to connect the drives of the network to those "personal computers" and Hamachi, even though it does a great job in some cases do not populate all the drives per server name. So to avoid issues the marketing department decided to better use the IP of the network drive. Of course, this is just a suggestion that might help any other users which might encounter similar situation. Now for the second part, the issues I found is also caused by Hamachi. Since the connection depends on the user Internet Connection, which is not under our control, if the connection get a sudden short interruption, some of the images in a currently opened documents shows the pixelate preview as mention. One suggestion I think might help is to add a refresh tool in the Resource Manager UI, this way, when the connection issue is resolved, one simply just refresh all images insuring they are properly linked by pressing that button.

Windows 10 Home Edition build 2004 Windows Insider Pre-Release Version on a Acer Predator Laptop 16Gb RAM GTX1060 (2018) ... Same issue happening when working with Intranet of a Remote Host. Affinity is having issues linking files. The suggested method is not a good practice is some instances, I cannot have a copy of all the images when used in different projects. Our graphics occupy almost 14 Tb in our network, imagine if we start copying the same images over and over again for multiple different projects. Now, there's also a couple more situations from my side. I have a file where I save renderings of files per brands and subcategories of the brand, when I get the error mentioned here I go to the Resource Manager and link the images back, this is a small project so it only have about 120 images and some of them are used multiple times in different pages. When I link an image I expect the Resource Manager to recognize when another missing image is in the same directory to also relink that file, but it doesn't. When the file loaded with the error all missing images show as pixelated previews in the screen. After updating all missing images one by one, the images relinked do not refresh to Hi-Res preview. What I mean is, once I go through the trouble of relinking each image, then I also have to close the application and open it again for it to show Hi-Res illustrations again, not a placeholder preview. If I don't do this when exporting the documents as a PDF all relinked images will look terribly pixelated.

This is kind of ??????, I'm trying to find a word that would've not be insulting, but I cannot think of any so I leave it to your imagination. This is a basic functionality, something more complex as importing assets is available, why not importing palettes? I just spend 2 hours getting a document to have all the colors I have on Adobe Creative Cloud Libraries for nothing, since I cannot even create a palette from a document, I have to select 200 color sets one by one. 😩 Can you make this a priority Affinity Team? You guys have made an awesome job, don't mess it up for something so basic. Meanwhile Solution But just in case someone is looking for a quick solution. Is not the best but what else can we do. Create a new Asset on the desktop version. Add as many objects you need, in my case I made an asset set of 64 rectangles and name them by the color name and apply that color to those objects, then I dragged the objects into the new assets. From there, just export the asset set and import it into Affinity Designer or Photo on iPad.

goqr.me has a free api for developers to generate QR Code on their applications... can this be implemented on Affinity Publisher or Designer, either way is good with me. With Affinity Publisher I just open Publisher, and I can switch to Designer persona to generate the QR Code.

I didn't knew that, thanks for the clarification. I was just repeating what the warning that prompt when opening one of those files, currently is still true... in semantics... because I can open them and save them as Publisher files and I still be able to reopen the original file on the original App.

True, and fair, but still you will be able to open *.aphoto and *.adesigner files. With or without the licenses when you open them in Publisher you cannot used them back in Photo or Designer, and still is fair. Have you ever dealt with Adobe InDesign? Only Photoshop allows you to save in formats you can open on all versions of Photoshop, and InDesign do not open PSD files, you can import them. That my friend give an incomparable value to Publisher. I can start a mock up on Photo, continue on Designer, and finishing up on Publisher, or you can either use Publisher itself with few limitations. But having the ability to open a Photo file with all its layers is unthinkable from the Adobe CC perspective. The Affinity developers are doing an amazing job here, and they deserve to profit from it. And no matter what the price, is a one time payment. Work hard in some project and invest in you.

For me I think would be fair to be more expensive than the other two. Is way better than InDesign since integrates all the same Studios as the other two, Designer and Photo, plus publication specific tasks as packaging, PDF engine for professional printing. All of those cost money to integrate and sometimes developers has to pay extra licenses to integrate those services, so my best bet they would cost double the price Designer and Photo. And I think is fair, as I mentioned before.

Inkscape has a very excellent tracing tool... if you need one. So far is the most precise I have ever tried. That way you don't have to make a mayor investment until Affinity Designer get the feature.