Search the Community

Indeed, it sounds helpful for .IDML imports and their names of global layers. But it appears cumbersome for a pure APub document which would require first to create the Layer layers and/or rename them manually, right? You didn't have to use them. Similar to AD where you can work with or without separate artboards you can work with 1 Layer layer only (= 1 global ID layer) which will contain all objects without any global hierarchy amongst them. Concerning layout / look that's true … and can get achieved with many other apps and quite less features. But in terms of efficiency – for which both Global layers & Master pages were developed – the need to detach multiple times and repeatedly page by page for individual, non-master-like objects during the layout creation process in APub makes this statement rather untrue. Even worse, if you use master pages as a substitute for global layers, the efficiency / advantage of such a layer handling shrinks massively as the complexity of the layout increases – quite the opposite of using Global layers.

You guys are aware that you can stack multiple master page layers on your layout pages as you see fit, right? set up your "to-become-global" layer(s) on (a) separate blank Master Page(s) apply the "Global Layer(s)" master page to all your pages; do NOT replace existing master page(s)! add content to the global layer(s) either on the master page, or individually on pages while temporarily detaching the parent master go to the corresponding master page to disable the layer(s) globally, be it 4 or 400 pages… Of course I've been using "global" layers in InDesign for almost 2 decades as well (hm, there was nothing else but global layers, and sometimes I thus hated them). Multiple languages, yada yada. I still can't think of a global layer scenario that I wouldn't be able to reproduce in Publisher by use of the method outlined here. But since the Affinity master page concept is so flexible, you have to plan carefully. Example (in Publisher 1, as I'm not at my Catalina MacBook): apu_global_layers_on_master_pages.mp4 As you can see at the end, usually you wouldn't necessarily want to enable or disable your parent "Global Layer" while editing the master page content detached. It will then disconnect from its "global" attribute. But you can always undo.

Thanks loukash and carl123 for explaining the progression of the "select same name" feature which has culminated in a workable compromise for me now and hopefully others. As explained in a previous post, like many others who have wanted to adopt Affinity Publisher coming from Adobe InDesign, we've been hampered by the lack of global layer support. I have a number of documents that have hundreds of pages with separate layers for different content, such as the original scan of a document on one layer, the transcription of the text on a second layer, an English translation on a third layer etc. I need to be able to switch each layer on and off on all pages across the whole document at once. I've always been able to import the document into Publisher but until now there has been no way I could show or hide each existing layer across the whole document with a couple of clicks. So after over three years of owning Publisher it is only now capable of doing what I need it to do, which is why it is a big deal to me but I understand why others may not be as excited, and of course proper global layer support would be ideal. Using master pages is not a solution that has or will ever work for me. At least now I have a way I can continue to work on my documents from InDesign in Publisher, but I still look forward to the day that we get proper "global layers". To answer your exact question quoted above though: I don't want to change anything on pages globally, each page is unique (different typefaces, sizes, colours etc), which is why master pages are not a solution. However, if I wanted to, having used "select same name" to select all my layers with the same name on every page, I can change properties such as opacity, colour etc. The reason InDesign and other desktop publishing software has "global layers" is to have grouped content across pages that can be switched on and off, reordered and locked/unlocked. Now in Designer I can switch the layers on/off and lock/unlock across the whole document, I just can't reorder the layers globally. Again, this is now a workable compromise for me, and I expect others, until layers finally become truly global.

Since we can change layer visibility across all pages of a document in V1 for master page layers already – without a need to name them first: Are there in V2 more changes you can apply to objects with a same name that made you choose this "Global Layers" thread to post your compliment for "Select Same Name"?

Yes this is very frustrating, especially since they told us in this forum that "global layers" or something would be coming before version 2.

I'm also disappointed to see that there is still no "Global Layers" support in Publisher v2. I bought Publisher v1 when it first came out and it didn't even cross my mind that DTP software would not have a global layers concept. I was so excited when I heard about the v2 release as I thought global layers would have been included for sure this time. I am a big fan of the Affinity Suite in general and I am very grateful to Serif for providing an excellent and cheaper alternative to Adobe. I switched to Affinity when my CS6 apps would no longer run on macOS when 32-bit support ended. I have some complex documents that have multiple layers that I need to be able to switch on and off across the whole document. Global layers is the one thing I'm missing and then Affinity would be perfect for all my needs. I'd even be prepared to pay double the price for just this feature! Having read the posts on this thread, the Master Pages suggestions just won't work for me unfortunately. So, if it is going to take a long time to implement global layers fully, would it be possible to add the following simple feature... Right-click on a layer in the list on any page and select an option that says something like: "Hide Layers Globally By Name" and "Show Layers Globally By Name". As the titles suggest, this feature would switch on/off all layers in the document that match the name of the one clicked on. This would be fine for my documents, which have imported ok into Publisher with all my layers intact, but I just need to be able to switch the layers on/off on every page with one action as they contain hundreds of pages. If that feature could be quickly added it would really save the day for me as I just can't delay my projects much longer waiting for full global layer support, and I can't afford Adobe or Quark subscriptions. Many thanks, Stewart

Big disappointment for me to see that this feature hasn't made it into 2.0, even though it's been in the talks for so long and reportedly Affinity was "working on it". I rely extremely heavily on this and now my hopes to ever fully transition to Affinity Publisher have been shattered for the time being. I have a feeling that global layers aren't a feature that would be introduced in an intermediate update. I opened a new "Global Layers" thread in the v2.0 discussions here.

+1 for global layers, in case this upvote is meaningful As for "professional", this means far more than trivial definitions might explain. A professional has a code of ethics that they apply to their work. They are responsible for the quality of their work and support this through standards established across their profession. There are many aspects to this, including open and honest communication. There is no such thing as professional software. That's just aspirational marketing. "Use our software and be professional!" No, software is just a tool. There is such thing as a professional software company. That would be a firm that stands behind their product, engages in open and honest communication, and supports users who are also professionals.

I suspect that many of those users are likely coming from the photo/illustration app world and leveraging the low cost of Publisher to get their feet wet in the DTP world, rather than coming from other DTP apps such as InDesign or QuarkXPress where the *only* layers they offer are what we are calling "global" layers here.

I'm kinda blown away with the lack of understanding of global layers. Coming from Indesign, it's natural to add text and graphic in separate layers that I can turn on and off with a simple click. Sometimes I just want to work with text, and can lock the graphic elements so I don't accidentally select them. This was a crucial tool for me in Indesign. Sometimes I want to create a right to left layout. Sometimes I want to create a printer friendly version. Sometimes I just want to lock the column headline or page borders, or just hide them (which I can do today with master page layers). I tried adding layers in the master pages, but I can't add page specific frames to that layer, so it's useless. If I can only toggle the frames on the actual master page, it's kinda useless. I tried using separate layers on each page, but it's just a hassle to set ut up on every single page, and it's not useful if I only got one graphic element per page.

Most people access web sites using the TCP/IP protocols, which were developed in the 70's, so a web site from the 90's is actually quite recent considering what you are going through in order to access it. Good choice. It is already a great program, just one which is not currently well-suited to your particular use case. Not in *all* other respects - no support for RTL or vertical languages, no global layers, questionable practices regarding the handling of global and spot colors, inadequate cross-reference support, virtually no interactive features (other than hyperlinks), no support for spreads of more than two pages, no support for custom slug areas (just a few pre-defined things that can be turned on or off), no support for variable or color fonts, ... ... ... Some users are much more heavily impacted by one or more of those things than by the lack of footnotes and endnotes.

+1 for non-printable (global) layers too I may not need them in each publication, but when I need them they're really needed. An alternative might be to create a draft layer type, Clip Studio Paint has this and it will never be exported when publishing to several file format (in this case image formats like TIFF, JPEG etc.). The intent for this layer is to keep draft sketches, lines, mockups etc. visible but never publish them. Basically this is the same as setting a global layer to non-printable but it does this automatically because of its layer type.

Why that? The need of energy as a 'global' property of vehicles to move does not mean all vehicles "in the world" use the identical energy, even not the same type of energy. (btw, where did I talk about 'global' in this thread? In fact the property of being locked is a document-wide property – but this doesn't say it affects all instances or all features of a document. That fact that "locked children" affects the use of the MoveTool doesn't influence the locked state of children: they are still locked, but not for all actions or features. Like the Layers Lock doesn't affect all properties of a locked layer: if selected you can e.g. colour it while you permanently see its active locked state in the layers panel. This layer is locked – even if not locked for everything. If you lock your car + unlock your home, then entering the home doesn't influence the locked state of the car and your car will be locked independently of where, when and how you locked it. Locking can be caused by a mechanical key, a wireless key, a software used from home … The car stays locked even if you then wash or paint it or change its tires, only the doors are affected, though we are used to say "the car is locked", not its tires, windows. If you open the windows before locking the car then you even can enter the car without unlocking it, its doors remain locked while you may move in & out. Each of the two materials (~ layers) has a hole. So both of them have the property of having a hole. This property is completely independent of HOW they got the hole. Their holes are not a property of a tool, e.g. a drill. These are their holes.

True that being locked would be a property of that door, but what you are suggesting by calling the "lock children" option a global property of the layers is the equivalent of saying that every door in the world is locked simultaneously by the same key, and that doesn't quite mesh with the reality of what is going on. If I drill a hole in a piece of wood, and the wood is up against something else that then receives a hole because the bit pushes through the first piece, does that mean that having a hole of that diameter is a property of a piece of wood sitting on the other side of the room?

It is a global setting which is a setting of the tool rather than a property of the layer itself. It has an effect on how the tool interacts with children of the layer which is being operated on by the tool. It has an effect on ALL layers in that if you then take the tool and apply it to a different layer (which has children) it will still be in effect for that layer as well, but it also has NO effect on ANY layers in that changing the setting in and of itself does NOTHING to any of the layers - it causes the move tool to behave differently and thus is a property of the tool. Thus, it makes perfect sense that it would be in the context toolbar where other tool properties can be found.

If you also have Affinity Designer installed, you can switch to the Designer persona and choose View -> View Mode -> Outline; this actually "sticks" even if you then switch back to the Publisher persona, but it is a global setting which impacts ALL layers at once, not just select ones. Being able to set this per-layer is actually something I had never really considered, but it is an interesting idea. What program(s) currently support that?

Serif has made it quite clear it will be some time before this feature shows up. Why you would have "waited" for it "in each release" is beyond me. They have said repeatedly that they do want to add it. No one ever said that they can't. It just is not a high priority right now and they are working on other things instead. It is not essential to me. I never produce documents in multiple languages myself, so I have no use for it whatsoever. I certainly see the value of being able to work in multiple languages, as many people do need that, and the possibility exists that I may one day have a use case for it (and thus I am interested in seeing this happen, though it is not nearly as high a priority as numerous other things that other people are similarly complaining about the lack of - cross-references for example are among the biggest ones for me, as are tables that span multiple pages; I also would like to see global layers added sooner than later). As others have also stated, this is something that clearly takes time to get right, and that is time Serif could be spending on other features that are much more essential to many people, and which they can get in place much more quickly than they could offer this.

There are various features already which don't exist in all of the 3 Affinity apps – nevertheless, Serif found their way to circumvent / solve such possible conflicts. Concerning Global Layers, you can already import an .idml file containing global layers, while Affinity has also for those a way to handle them without being able itself to the global layer properties of an .idml. – For further aspects you might read this thread, this possible, Affinity internal in-/compatibility got discussed before, especially since Nov 2021. "Linked layers" have a quite different functionality than Global Layers. They are much more similar to Master Page Layers and their linking behavior to objects. These links must be created individually for each object that is to be linked in this way. Whereas Global Layers are no objects visible on a documents page (e.g. like Master layers) but general items of a common hierarchical structure and higher-level layer order throughout an entire multi-page document. Once created they exist on every page, independent of eventually objects. They don't have the goal to cause a link between specific objects, instead any object modification does neither touch Global Layers nor gets reflected by Global Layers. Only modification to Global Layers affects other Global Layers (incl. containing objects), e.g. changing a position within the global hierarchy. But therefore they don't need to get linked by the user, they are linked by their functionality by default.

Hi Ecifircas, if you are working with Indesign, you are working with Global Layers. If you work with Affinity Publisher, each page has its own layers. Only with masters layers you can have the same layers similar to Indesign. The difference is that to move-modify an object in a page you have to apply a permission. If you try your work into Affinity Publisher I think the difference will be more clear

Hey, I'm just looking into this conversation, and I haven't quite read through all 7 pages, so this question might have been addressed before, but there is something I don't understand. 'Global layers' seem to suggest a set of overarching layers that are higher in the hierarchy than regular layers. As I understand, this would not match with the use of layers in the other apps which is not nested. On the other hand a 'linked layer' (as exists in Photo) makes more sense to me. It would exist at the same level of regular layers but its behaviour would be linked across pages. It could be implemented starting from the existing 'linked layer' from Photo and adapt its behaviour to workflows typically used in lay-outing (eg. auto-create all linked layers in all new pages, of course without any objects). This seems simpler, so am I missing something? PS: For those who think long, multi-language documents don't exist in a single layout: I am now working on an atlas of 400-500 pages (in InDesign). All legends, captions and introductory texts are indeed in two languages. This use case is definitely not hypothetical in Belgium.

Hi you all, with the respect of all of your opinions, and without the intent to bother you I add my opinion too! If this system actually work for all of you, I am happy with that. But maybe a lot of people are a little bit while working struggling as I do. Then, here it is my case: I often work with creative documents, with several pages (like 100) and two languages. I always check, revision, edit my texts and objects, until exhaustion (it's part of the creative process)... they are never positioned by me once and forever - without modifications - for the whole process. But these files also last for years in some cases, then it is not "ok creative part is done", or "ok let's export and now I finished". They are cyclical. Update, export, update, change, export, update, export... etc. This means that: 1-- If I use Master layers -> I will lose a lot of time in the creative process. And it is a lot, I can ensure it. 2-- If I don't use Master Layers -> I will lose a lot of time on switching on-off page by page the language I don't need, everytime I have to update and export my files. I do it continuously Then, I would appreciate to ADD (not replacing) the current feature with a Global Layer behavior!

I could be off here, but I am interpreting a linked spread to be what a master page is now - renaming the current master pages - which appear as a single local (non-global) layer on each page they are applied to. This would preserve compatibility for existing documents as there is no clear way to represent the existing master pages amongst the global layers of a page once they are added. Then a new master page would be introduced which would have the same global layers as the normal pages of the document, which would not need to appear as a layer itself in the document since its content would simply be rendered at the bottom of each individual global layer on each page the master is applied to. If this assumption is correct: They open essentially as-is, with no visible global layers, and with current master pages renamed as linked spreads. Should existing Master Pages be converted into a new Linked Spread and would this feature be useful for other things Yes, maybe. Should Master Page items be visible in the Layer panel for the current spread Suggest yes when editing the items is enabled, no when it is disabled, but the names of the layers from the master page(s) should appear in some different color or some similar mechanism should be provided to distinguish at a glance from the layers of the spread itself. Should we replace multiple master pages per spread with Master Pages that can inherit from other Master Pages I see no reason why these would need to be mutually exclusive, but I think that inheritance would be preferable to multiple masters if we need to choose. For linked spreads (assuming I am correct that this is a renaming of the current master pages) the current behavior should be maintained for compatibility. Should Global Layers be the default for Publisher Suggest adding a checkbox to the new document window, much as there is one for creating an artboard when a Designer document is being created. What would be the benefit, and how would they be layered around the global layers that did exist? The global layers are always at the top of and are the only thing at the top of the hierarchy. Everything else inside them. They effectively create the overall layering structure of the entire document, so for something to exist on the page which is not in a global layer implies that it is not a visible entity. If you were to have non-global layers outside of the global layers, how would they be layered on the page amongst the global layers? Each would in effect need to be in an implied global layer of its own - in which case it may as well not be implied but be actual... Yes, in effect the product currently behaves as if there is one global layer that everything is inside of, that layer is invisible, and there is no way to make it visible or to add another. I would think the preferable behavior would be that when the first global layer is created by the user, the existing hidden one becomes visible instead, that being the newly "created" global layer, with the existing content of each spread or master page contained within it. Then the second global layer that is created is created as empty. That's just me though... While not really essential, these would certainly be very nice to have, as would layer FX, compositing mode and opacity for each global layer (much like the existing per-spread layers) to add something of a special touch.

This thread has been going on for some 3 ½ years now and still we are waiting for "global layers". Those who don't need them don't care (or even don't understand). But those who need them need them desperately. I frequently create multi language documents and I still pay a sh*tload each month to keep my InDesign subscription - even though I paid for and own Affinity Publisher. I have to stick with ID because multi language documents are a nightmare without global layers. I am not giving up hope and have my fingers crossed for a solution soon.

Gosh - im shocked that this layerconcept is still fact. I do many projects where global layers are mandatory. So now publisher is not usable for me, sorry but this is an factor of exclusion 😞

Well, yes, they can exist. But then we are unable to use Pages or Master Pages without converting. Well…I guess my point could be moot. If Artboards can exist in Publisher and maintain their Layer structure, as they seem to do already, then why not have Global Layers move across Publisher and Designer? It would be essentially the same construct. Fair enough. I rescind my previous arguments. Global Layers for all!