Jump to content

kimtorch

Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kimtorch

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. No, it doesn't work similarly for other modes. On the Mac the unit is only available in Resample. It may be a bug, but it definitely doesn't work on Unconstrained as Loukash's screenshot shows. And in Resample you can't do it with a single dimension, the 'crop' is constrained to a two parameter ratio. For people working on a few web images or designing small flyers or posters it may not matter too much but when you're producing hundreds of pages each week and you want standardised widths for all images this sort of thing makes a difference. It's also why the lack of scripting is suc
  2. The problem is exactly what you just described - I can't have an unconstrained crop in centimetres. An unconstrained crop should still be able to have one dimension - as Photoshop has had since I started using it circa 1992. AP doesn't allow this as it REQUIRES both parameters as detailed in my original post. I get you don't see it as an issue, that doesn't mean it's not an issue for others. It's a basic function which should be available if it expects to compete with PS.
  3. You can't ignore the height, you must enter a value if you want to use centimetres. The ONLY way you can have unconstrained crop is using pixels. It's annoying given all other measurements (rulers, transform etc) are all in Cms. It makes no sense to use multiple units when the user has chosen the one they want.
  4. Affinity Photo cropping is doing my head in. Here's what we currently do dozens of times a day in Photoshop. Open an image, set a width and a resolution in the crop tool. Leave the height blank. Draw our unconstrained crop box. Double click in the middle to crop. A few seconds, max. For the life of me, in Affinity Photo I can't find a way to replicate this process: 1) crop to a width only (seems you have to also specify a height) 2) have Unconstrained crop appear in Centimetres despite have Centimetres select as units in Transform panel. If I type 15cm i
  5. This is the key - Affinity are working on the tools and forgetting about the result (getting the job done). Here's an analogy. I have a really nice Dewalt cordless screwdriver. It's a fantastic tool I enjoy using but if I had to screw in 5000 screws it wouldn't matter how good the tool is the job becomes slow, boring and uneconomical. This is why companies use robotics in manufacturing - it's essentially mechanical scripting. No matter how pretty and elegant the interface, I don't want to have to have to create 100, 500, 1000 PDFs manually. Or manually place images, create boxes, format
  6. It's been almost three years since my original post and not a word on progress or even possibilities from Affinity. Clearly automation isn't high on their priority list. I'd imagine if there'd been internal discussion at Affinity they would have reached out (maybe privately) to some of the people here who have vast knowledge and experience scripting publishing apps. Implementation and beta testing for a large scripting environment would be a huge undertaking and if it hasn't started now I have little faith it will be with us inside a couple of years. Sadly, I have little faith it's E
  7. I've given up on Affinity. I started this thread over two years ago with great hope of replacing CC but there's been zero input from Affinity regarding progress on scripting which gives me little confidence anything will be coming. It seems the primary market for Publisher, Designer etc is smaller agencies who might not benefit greatly from scripting. I continue to tweak our InDesign scripts and software every few weeks and I just can't see how we could survive doing everything manually. I'm retiring from the trade next year so it's not going to be relevant to me anyway, but it's a
  8. We produce several hundred pages each week of the same size with the same columns (newspaper pages). I've made a custom sized page and created a preset but I can't see any way of applying column guides to the preset. Am I missing something or can you not have column guides on a custom page (preset)?
  9. Not much to add except "me too". It's actually the first thing I've tried on Affinity Photo and I had to go straight back to Photoshop bcause I was getting almost identical results to you with Invert.
  10. I'm curious why they have this behaviour. We will often drag an image to the pasteboard before placing it properly. It seems totally counter-intuitive and I can't think of any other application that does this.
  11. It's not about making sub-optimal choices, it's about competing with the duopoly market leaders. It's no point having a 'unique' product that no-one wants to move to. This is what is frustrating to me. People espouse their personal favourites but no-one has yet demonstrated it in action (and I've already asked a couple of times in this discussion). Saying it's technically possible and making it both user friendly and efficient are entirely different things. Do you really think the average designer who fools around with a few scripts wants to be digging into CLI tools and 'underl
  12. This is the most frustrating part of this discussion for me. The established languages for scripting InDesign and Quark are javascript and Applescript yet people are talking python, perl, C# or any other language they can think of. For all those suggesting python, how many of you are currently scripting InDesign with it? How many of you are interacting between apps like Filemaker and InDesign with python? Show me some working code and convince me. Affinity need to take users away from Adobe and making well established users learn a new language isn't going to help. We use over one hu
  13. So how do you handle these things now in your existing InDesign scripted workflow?
  14. I haven't had a lot to say here because - to be frank - we don't need Affinity Designer. I WANT to change to Designer, but we already run successfully with the Adobe products and can continue to do so. The point I'm trying to make is that Affinity need to persuade or entice existing ID scripters with a compelling reason to move. They're not going to do that by trashing everything they've invested in either Applescript or Javascript with ID. The other issue that people keep ignoring is inter-application scripting. I don't just want to script Affinity Designer - I want to talk to Filemaker,
  15. Just because Adobe's implementation isn't great doesn't mean Affinity's won't be. This aside, the major thing that you're missing is the integration with other applications. For example, I can't use Python to access a Filemaker database and script that into AP (or ID). I can't easily tap into my Mail program or Capture One or Excel or my own apps. People tend to forget the cross application integration that Applescript allows. I'm not for a moment suggesting Applescript or Javascript (with which I have little experience) are perfect, but they *are* extremely practical and Applescript
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.