Steps

Is there even a configuration option in Publisher?

True words, thank you. If I would have started out with InDesign instead of printers photobook creation software the Picture Frame handling wouldn't bother me so much. If you learn it right from the start this way and never see an alternative option you wouldn't care. I think this causes of lack of understanding from others under my posts that suggest to do it else (or more to give a option to it else). So your words come really true. But I think me and @Jens Koopmann have a valid point stating at this early phase of development problems other might have, too. This is not meant to bad-mouth Publisher, but to help Serif seeing where is room for improvement. For every person who is "complaining" (as @thomaso called my postings above) there are many else who will not say anything but silently evaluate Publisher to not useful to them. This would be sad because after trying many other tools for photobook creation in the meantime I can say for sure that Publisher is a wonderful product that deserves high sales. I really like it. And for the things I don't like and want to see to change I take time to write them down, because I want to help development. @jmwellborn and some others asked me to either take it or leave it. I think she is wrong, because this software just entered beta and this is an oppurtunity to see if one can change things to make it a better tool. She would be right if I would write into the InDesign forums to ask Adobe changing things. As InDesign is finished this would lead to nowhere. But I think (or hope) the situation here is different. And of course I'm guided by my own interest: I want the ideal photobook creation software (that also gives me printable high-quality PDF) for the years to come as I plan many more photobooks. I also like to see what other people think of Publisher and miss. We are free to discuss.

"Demanding up to complaining"? Are you serious? I suggest features that I think would be useful. Maybe strongly suggest. Thats not demanding. At least I did not mean that. I had to explain my point over and over since some people did not read careful what I wrote in the first place. And pointing at some serious usability flaws is not complaining. I try to make them visible so Serif is aware. It is up to them them to decide if the leave it this way. You are one of the people that think suggestions here should only be counting missing features InDesign has. EDIT: And most of the software on your link is really outdated or even not suitable for photobook creation, so I skip those sites. I did some research upfront. This is how I found Publisher. If you are aware of any other software that might serve my purpose, please give me a hint. I'll try out. Thank you.

You missunderstand. I want to use it, really. There are just little things I miss. So I suggest to add them. It is close to what I am looking for. Sadly after more testing I figured out that PagePlus X9 also misses some things I really like about Publisher. So it is still not ideal. I think it's okay to ask how things handeld and suggest improvements. Don't you?

I feel that there is no config option.

If I move an Object with keyboard Publisher shows me distances to other Objects. I wonder how this is called, if & where I can configure it and if this is something new in Publisher compared to PagePlus X9. Can I somehow activate this in PagePlux X9 or is this a new feature?

Thanks for posting this. I wish I had read this before. Would have saved me some time until I discovered that right now I don't want Publisher, but PagePlus (even if abandoned).

@fde101 @dominik @Seneca @haakoo OMG, guys... you could have told me in the first place... By accident I read a thread here on the forum where a PagePlus X9 user complains over the changes to the Picture Frame. That lead me to investigate how PagePlus did it. Before that I just assumed that this may not have changed from PP to Publisher. Guess what... It works exactly like the photo creation software of Rossmann and Pixum as shown in the videos above. I don't know why I did not check out PagePlus first. Maybe because it will get no updates anymore. But right now it seems to be exactly what I want. The good thing is I no more have to explain Serif staff how I want the picture frame to behave - just that I want an "behave like PagePlus"-option.

I work on a photobook I plan to order in the next weeks and hope for the best. :-D If it goes wrong maybe Serif can help me and if not there should be a possibility to use an older version to export everything as PSD and an non-rasterized PDF as fallback backup. So my plan.

Yes. I think they rewrite their products to include Apple. That seems to be the main point. For you and me as Windows user I expect no substantial changes. I also miss an Android app.

Just that. Completely rewritten under the hood to enable usage of new technologies.

I think a least the technical base got a big overhaul with multi platform support and so on. So it is not just the name.

Just for you I started over with a clean thread and fresh videos to explain again what I meant. Please see if this helps you to understand. If you still do not get it I give up explaining it to you, sorry.

I like to have an option on a Picture Frame that ensures that the images inside cannot leave the picture frames borders. This is the default behavior of several software like Serif PagePlus X9, Xara Designer Pro X and a couple of end user photobook creation software. Picture Frames now work like in InDesign and I acknowledge that some people want/need it that way. This idea is about giving an option to change it for those who are familar or can better work with the other behavior. For a better understanding what I'd like to have please see the attached short video demonstrations. xara_designer_pro_x.mp4 rossmann.mp4 pixum.mp4 --- And for those who are not familar with InDesign an additional video of the behavior that seemingly inspired the way it's working today in Publisher: indesign.mp4

At Staff: Please lock this discussion. It got way off-topic and turned into a general discussion about everything. I will open a new clean thread trying to explain it again.

@Sean P I just captured a screen recording to make sure that we are talking about the same behaviour as a bug. Please let me now if this is expected behaviour and I misconfigured something. I found that the shadow seems to be somehow relative to the pictures placed DPI. layer_effect_broken.mp4

Yes, I know, but sometimes things get fixed without mention and as I explicitely tested this again I wanted to bump it. Not that they forget about it.

Still broken in 1.7.0.206

Still missing in 1.7.0.206 See attached video: missing_alingment.mp4

Installation on Win10 worked and all my documents still open.

Still broken in 1.7.0.206

Thank you! Yes, this is a very suitable workaround solution to recover missing resources. Nice one. I will remember that. :-)

You are joking, are you? I did that very detailed, even with sample videos. My question was never how Image handling is done in Publisher. I know that. I just feel it could be done better. Please read the things I wrote in this topic more careful and give feedback to my suggestion.

Yes, of course you're right. What I meant is "a PDF created by InDesign". There are some printers like Saal Digital that give out detailed specifications for the PDF to be able to be printed. They also have a InDesign Plugin and templates for InDesign and PhotoShop. So you can use any tool to create it. And on the other hand there are services like CEWE which only have a InDesign plugin and demand that you have to use that to produce the PDF. No other details specified. So you can only use InDesign beside their propritary end user photobook creation software. My point was that many photo book printers say "hey, you can design a PDF with InDesign and send us that". So InDesign is indeed used for photobooks and therefore this is a use case for Publisher, too. Whenever I write "InDesign PDF", assume that this is short for "PDF export by InDesign using specific job profiles".

Yeah, as I said: Not helpful. Your answer only states that you did not understand my point. You even give no reason why. This is no valueable feedback. Why do you post here anyway if you have nothing to say that helps the case? I don't get people like you, sorry.