lineweight

It's a bit hard to understand what's in it for Canva. Surely they haven't paid an enormous amount of money, to enable you to carry on making upgrades for existing users for free.

From the FAQ I bet V3 will come as a subscription model. I wonder if a cut-off date will come, after which if you haven't purchased the current software, there will be no further opportunity to buy a perpetual licence. That's what happened with the CAD/3D software I use. They try to make out they are being kind to long-time users as we can still buy a "perpetual" licence each year but the first year we don't buy one, we lose that, and are forced into a subscription only arrangement. The affordable cost and non-subscription pricing are Affinity's USPs, for me at least. Are the apps themselves amazing or unique? No, they are simply good and let you get the job done. Disappointing that this seems to happen to absolutely everything now.

Ok. Thanks. This works when the image is listed in the layers pane as "(image)" but not when it's listed as "(pixel)". I'm not sure why they are different as they are both tiff files placed into picture frames.

Thanks. I actually was looking at that thread before starting this one. These are the methods listed there 1) Go to Document > Colour Format > Greyscale. Although I never use this as it's destructive and removes the colour information permanently 2) Go to Layer > New Fill Layer, fill it with white and set the layer blend mode to 'Colour' 3) Add a Channel Mixer Adjustment Layer and change the Output Channel to 'Grey' 4) Add a Curves Adjustment Layer, set the layer blend mode to 'Colour', then drag the bottom-left corner point of the curve to the top-left corner (so that it's a horizontal line) 5) Add a HSL Adjustment Layer and drag the 'Saturation Shift' slider all the way to the left (-100%) 6) Add a Black & White Adjustment Layer 7) Add a Black & White Adjustment Layer, and change the default values from 100%, to the following values to mimic method 3 (adding a Channel Mixer Adjustment Layer). R=29.8%, Y=88.5%, G=58.9%, C=69.9%, B=11.4%, M=41.2% (for RGB 8-bit images only, the values will be different for RGB 16-bit images). You can record this as a macro. 😎 Add a Soft Proof Adjustment Layer and set the Proof Profile to 'Greyscale D50'. This will mimic method 1 (Document > Colour Format > Greyscale) 9) To do it via 'Layer Effects' for a layer or group. Open the 'Layer Effects' settings. Go to 'Colour Overlay' and set Blend Mode to Colour, Opacity to 100% and Colour to white or black. Method 1 wouldn't work for me as I don't want to change the whole document, just certain images. Methods 2-4 and 7-9 would be rather laborious to do individually for each image. Method 5 doesn't seem to work for me. I can do this on two images and they don't end up the same tonally. Method 6 does work. However, it does something to the image that I need to fix by adjusting levels. That's OK but it worries me it's introducing changes that don't need to happen. So, am wondering if there are any better approaches. If not, I'll go with this.

Realised I had to activate "show context toolbar" in the view menu. I don't seem to get the "K only" option though, when I select an image in a picture frame.

I've seen this mentioned in other threads but I can't seem to find it in my top toolbar. Do I need to be in a particular persona or have something turned on?

I have multiple B&W images in a Publisher document, some of which have actually been scanned in colour. So if I do no adjustment on them, they are all slightly different in tone (some of them have a sepia tone, some slightly blueish). I'd thought that using the HSL adjustment, simply moving the saturation slider right down to the minimum would make an image truly monochrome, but this does not seem to be the case. Is there a best-practice (or least complex) way of making all these images consistent in tone?

Can I ask why you'd do the adjustments before converting? Would it not be better to see the final results of what I'm going to get, while I'm actually doing the adjustments? Or is it that I can do the adjustments in RGB to get what I'd ideally like, and then leave the conversion process to give me the nearest best version within the limits of CMYK?

Hmm, as I thought might happen, two conflicting opinions. But I have asked the printer if they can recommend which profile I use and/or send me the one for their printer.

Can anyone give me any pointers here?

I am coming up against this problem too. So the only solution is to use a very thin stroke for the outline? Is 0.2p what works or would 0.1p work too?

I'm reasonably comfortable making adjustments to RGB images in Affinity Photo. And usually the images are for display on screen or maybe in within documents to be viewed online, so I don't need to worry about converting to CMYK. Now however I am producing (in Affinity Publisher) some PDFs to be sent to a commercial printer, so the document is set up as CMYK. These PDFs will contain multiple photos that I am placing into the Affinity Publisher document, and because all these photos will be alongside each other I will want to do some tweaking to colours to make them reasonably consistent. Plus there are some that are scanned where I'll want to remove bits of colour cast and so on. My question is: where in my workflow should I make these colour adjustments? a) Get them all as good as possible, editing them in Affinity Photo still in RGB, and then import them into the Publisher document (at which point I assume Affinity does some kind of conversion on them)? or b) Import them all as they are into the Publisher document, so the RGB to CMYK conversion has already happened, and then do my tweaking and adjusting? If I use method (b) then when, say, I do a levels adjustment on the images, it all looks slightly different to what I'm used to, which is a little disconcerting but I'm not sure if I need to worry about it. But if there are no major downsides to that method, it's possibly what I'd prefer to do because it allows me to make the adjustments while the images are next to each other and in their final context.

Actually I have just discovered that I can, after all, include crop marks etc via the "Export" dialogue. Just have to press the "more" button at the bottom to access these options.

Yes, I will ask them. But even if I send them as single pages most of my questions remain. Ok, thanks. Ok. It seems surprising that what seems like quite basic functionality is missing from Publisher.

Most of the time when I'm using Publisher it's for stuff that I'll print myself or which will only exist in digital format. I now need to make a booklet that I can prepare as a PDF to send to a commercial printer, and am trying to get my head around how best to do this. It appears there are two routes to creating a "print ready" PDF: Option 1: The "Export" function in the "File" menu - This will export a PDF laid out as a series of spreads, that is page 1 will sit next to page 2 just like it will in the finished booklet. (Alternatively as a series of pages where each page appears as its own individual sheet) - I can choose to include bleeds but I can't include crop marks - So the PDF is something like this: Option 2: The "save as PDF" function in the "Print" dialogue - Here I can choose "booklet" as an option for the "model" and then it will export a PDF laid out as the sheets will actually be printed at the printers - which from my limited knowledge is known as "imposition". So page 1 will no longer sit alongside page 2 in the exported PDF. - I can choose to include bleeds and I can also include crop marks - I think this is only available because I have a mac (it's actually done via the OS not Affinity?) - So the PDF is something like this: My questions: - Are there any pitfalls to worry about, using one route rather than the other? For example, is using the "save as PDF" approach more likely to add issues with things like colour management because the OS is getting involved with the output as well as Affinity? - Am I right that there's no way to add crop marks if I want to use the File>Export approach? Therefore, if the printer requests that the PDF I send them includes crop marks, I must use the "save as PDF" method? - Am I right that the "dimensions" under "spread setup" is where the size of the finished printed document (that is after the printer has trimmed to size) is set, and the only place I ever specify the overall size of the print-ready PDF document (that is, including any bleed, crop marks etc) is when I get to the print dialogue? - As a follow-on to the above, if I simply use file>export to export a PDF to the printer (and include the bleed), then the overall size of the PDF they receive is the "spread setup" dimensions plus the bleed along each edge? Therefore, for them to know what the intended finished size is, I need to tell them the bleed size and then they need to subtract this from the overall size of the PDF I have sent them (because there are no crop marks on the document itself)? Thanks if anyone can clarify any of this!