Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lorox

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It crossed my mind that maybe not all readers/contributors here are familiar with InDesign in general and with what InDesign’s options for underline formatting can achieve. And – that said – why I strongly suggest that similar options should be included in Publisher. For clarification I'm showing a screenshot made using a German language version of InDesign CS 5: The red rounded box around "9354x" is solely made by formatting the underline options as seen at the bottom and the "effect" can be saved as a character style for quick application to other characters, which I find extremely useful. An easier or more elemental application of this technique would (e.g.) be "highlighting" text in some sort of coloured text marker style – with that rounded red box you actually have to add some "hard coded" space like a quarter m-space before and after the text you want surrounded by the red area). You can also do similar things with the strikethrough option, but as the strikethrough is (in z-axis) placed above the text, its uses are certainly more limited. Last but not least (in InDesign) there's also paragraph lines which can be edited accordingly and thus offer a ton of interesting and time saving formatting options (which can be saved as paragraph styles, accordingly). Maybe it becomes a bit more clear now, why I would love to have Publisher offer that functionality as well.
  2. Regarding my post here it has crossed my mind that maybe not everybody has been or still is a user of InDesign and accordingly may not be familiar with the separations and ink coverage preview feature which I described and really would like to see in Publisher in similar functionality. So I'm attaching 3 screenshot which should illustrate what I meant (I hope it becomes sufficiently clear even though the screenshots are from a German language version): BTW: as the mouse pointer/crosshair is not captured in the screenshot it should be said that it had been positioned right in the center where the red and black boxes overlap – the "composite" preview shows all colours (full CMYK) and displays the corresponding ink values for each colour according to mouse position – in the "single" preview M, Y and K have been deselected and only Cyan values are shown in relative grayscale percentage – in the "ink coverage" preview (activated by setting the popup menu to "Farbauftrag" [ink coverage]) you see the same colour values assigned to the individual colours AND you see the area marked in red where ink coverage is above 300% (you can set the desired "warning" percentage on the right) If there was a spot colour used in the document this colour would be listed below the CMYK separations and the values would be displayed accordingly. I hope it becomes clear why I think this a very valuable feature to have in a page layout app. When you're working on print projects and have a palette or "studio" like this, you can check crucial properties of your doccument in terms of colour usage very intuitively and on the fly – you don't have to wait until you export to PDF and maybe just then get some errors you possibly could have avoided if you had been able to inspect your document in a way as such a feature offers.
  3. Up to this day I wasn't aware of what is likely to come... I guess, however that it is in fact quite the sort of thing I was thinking of. It remains to be seen how that'll turn out in detail. I'm really looking forward to it! What I said about checking ink coverage and separations is probably not entirely to be seen as part of a final flightcheck but a way of being able to check on those values any time while working on the document. Just like InDesign handles it – more a different way to be able to look at the design and be given "colour warnings" (if necessary) at an earlier stage than at final export.
  4. I strongly support the idea of a dedicated preflight check feature as I don't think everybody using Publisher can fall back to a version Acrobat Pro on his or her hard drive to do that job properly. In another discussion on the forum here I also expressed my urgent wish that there should be some panel like InDesign's "Separation Preview" and an customizeable ink coverage checker which will tell you visuallly where in your document objects may have more ink coverage than a certain value which you can set beforehand. (e.g. to spot critical objects when you work with a printer that demands ink coverage in a CMYK PDF shouldn't exceed 300%) Another thing important to me would be the option to change/convert any spot colours which have accidentally found their way into the document (e.g. with some logo placed there) to global CMYK colours from within the colour pallette so as to remove spot colours completely from the document and not just not "honouring" them in the export settings.
  5. Thanks, I wouldn't have thought of that... Actually, however, checking ink coverage is quite important for me as many online printers do not want more than overall 300% coverage and I feel much more comfortable when sending out print PDFs if I know beforehand that there won't be trouble in that regard. Say what you want about Adobe InDesign but they've got some features just right there and I hope Publisher will learn from some of those in future updates. All things considered I tend to feel that PDF export from Publisher leaves something to be desired yet as I usually get several error messages when flightchecking a Publisher generated PDF for print in Acrobat Pro. According to some prepress forums I visited I also might not be the only one (which might indicate that it's not just me doing something wrong when exporting those PDFs).
  6. Exactly! I especially miss the ability of what in InDesign is called "Separations Preview" where you can check the individual separations of your document before exporting a PDF and you can also check on the ink coverage of individual objects (and even let the program indicate all areas in the layout were ink coverage is above a certain value that you can set individually beforehand). This is so useful in professional prepress work that I DEARLY miss this feature in Affinity Publisher. PLEASE add something like this in a (near) future update!
  7. I think this is in fact not satisfactory as I REALLY like to have the option to change/convert a given spot colour to its correspondent global CMYK colour – so to speak on a colour swatch basis – within the swatches pallette. Often when you're doing a print layout (here: in Publisher) you receive logos from a client which are to be used there and which (from their original "ideal" design) contain spot colours that you definitely will NOT use in printing then and in the future as it is all going to be pure CMYK (mainly because of economic reasons as spot colours tend to be quite expensive in everyday printing). To avoid any problems beforehand(!) when preparing PDFs for giving to the printer it has over the years been very useful/effective for me in InDesign to be able to change any spot colours to global CMYK from within the swatches pallette. I really DO wish this were possible in Publisher as well!
  8. Hi garrettm30, I agree totally with you when you point at the Affinity apps being (relatively) new as compared to those by Adobe. That said it only seems natural to give Affinity/Serif some time to further improve their already great apps in order to add something like the (possibly advanced) features which have proven to be actually quite useful in InDesign & co. But then Adobe so far has had decades(!) more of time to come up with them... Yeah, we shouldn't forget that to be fair when we compare things. The disparity of features within the same "family" of apps is actually something which has bothered me a lot during the time I've used the Adobe CS(!) apps (which, I admit, I still do for legacy reasons). This is certainly annoying – especially when you observe that those disparities don't get straightened or unified even after several major updates. Instead Adobe has seen it more fitting to add several special – and possibly rarely used in real life – features selectively to one or the other of their apps... I really hope, Affinity/Serif having the benefit of a fresh and more coordinated start in terms of development will see to that things remain very closely related if not identical in handling things within Designer/Photo/Publisher. Talking of this, I recently wondered why there doesn't seem to be a thing like "Snapshots" in Publisher (being the most recent app) whereas in Designer and Photo this feature has been there (I think) from the beginning? Even given that Snapshot’s functionality is IMHO not yet as perfect as it should be, it’s a useful feature nevertheless and it should really be available in Publisher, too... It would be a nice thing to have consistently a your hands in all of the 3 apps.
  9. Having looked around a bit more I have to add to my comment/suggestion made above: while it has served me very well in years past, the way InDesign handles the options of underlines and strikethroughs might not be – in respect to the actual specs of the font they are applied to – what should really be expected in ways of font design. At least when you just go for the defaults. Here ( https://www.harbortype.com/blog/the-state-of-underlines-and-strikethroughs/ ) is an interesting blog post on the subject. Yet, in that post Affinity Designer is stated to handle things quite right (but ONLY regarding the default handling, as customizing the appearance of underlines and strikethroughs is not possible so far. As it isn't in Publisher, neither and regrettably). However, as it is there now seems to be a proper chance for the Affinity apps to do things right right from the start, should the developers – hopefully – decide to give users full control over the features in question. Having the defaults right in the first place should be a good place to take off from into the finer aspects of custom designing appeareances here. So I'd say: look what you can already do in InDesign, give us Affinity users these options as well, but make it even BETTER! For example measurements like line thickness, offset and so on should (also) be available in units relative to the character size and not just in fixed units like points or millimeters. When using relative units, changes made to the text attributes (most notably a change of font size) would be immediately reflected in the appearance of the underlines and strikethroughs. This could save so much time as you wouldn't have to adjust everything by hand after making a character/word bigger or smaller (as it is inevitable when handling things like InDesign does).
  10. I strongly support the suggestion that there just HAVE to be options to style the way characters can be underlined as well as having similar options for paragraph rulers. InDesign does (has done for years to be exact) in fact a very good job regarding typographic finetuning in these respects and it would be quite a shame if Affinity Publisher continued to fall short of those typographic options. I admit that these are not of the kind of options which you just stumble upon when you begin page layout/design but once you know these are available it opens up a ton of creative possibilities to style your text on the page. You'll never want to miss it again...! I remember very well what true revelation it had been for me when I finally discovered what was actually possible in InDesign by tweaking those options of underlining, strikethrough (on character basis) and paragraph rulers (on paragraph basis) – there is so much more to it than first meets the eye (or mind, at that). So PLEASE study InDesign well in this respect and give users of Affinity Publisher similar control(s)!
  11. That, actually, was what I thought in the back of my mind... ;-( (despite making that suggestion)
  12. Yes, exactly – same with me! Especially as many of those going for the Affinity apps these days (and for a reason...) often have years of experience with the Adobe apps and their workflow. As said before: it's certainly no good idea to mimick other established programs too closely and ending up with a copy that's just got another name, but besides coming up with convincing and intuitive new fresh concepts to do things it is not a bad idea, however, to closely study the rivals and see where they actually may have a point. Learning from your "enemies" might well increase the chance to beat them eventually... Your idea regarding the representation of a (circular/elliptical) gradient is interesting, but I see the same problems with additional inbetween colour stops. They would have to be on each axis, I'd think, but connected or "mirrored" in a way.
  13. There's something to what you say and you may be quite right, saying that it isn't exactly simple, but then why don't let the rotation come with some default of the other (more special) possible settings (meaning: having endpoints at outer boundaries for a a start and midpoint at center of the object)? In many cases this could be a basis which is already roughly(!) what you were going for (instead of just an arbitrary starting point like a plain left to right gradient). Of course you can always go for further tweaking later on.
  14. So far all reactions have been to my problem with the Follow/Notification problem, which of course is solved by now (thanks to you). I'm just wondering, however, if I'm actually the only one around here who would appreciate having that feature of direct gradient rotation control within that gradient details context box... (more or less like in Photoshop, where you can do that e.g. in the gradient's settings for a gradient fill layer or the gradient overlay fx) I really think it would be quite ergonomic to be immediately able to dial in a rotation and not always being forced to make that second step of changing to the gradient tool just for finally setting the rotation.
  15. Hi Isabel, I guess this been solved meanwhile, but I just encountered the same problem (although with a cheap but usable Gaomon graphics tablet). While using the brush I was used to just hold the ALT key and click on an area on the canvas in order to pick that colour to the brush (or rather as the new current foreground colour) – that's been the way to go in Photoshop for ages... As this didn't seem to work in Affinity Photo I was quite irritated at first but then it turned out that in Affinity Photo you have to actually (and noticeably) DRAG(click) the stylus (or the mouse) – doing a click while remaining stationary doesn't do anything. Cheers L. P.S.: Keep up those nice YouTube videos you do. These have been helping me quite a bit while getting into the Affinity apps.

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.