Jump to content

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, loukash said:

Yep, a manual non-breaking space to the rescue. But other than that…

I prefer to work without changing the text stream itself just for formatting, as those things disrupts future different layouts or other purposes (such as putting online).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The glyph scaling is only a minor aspect of the Adobe InDesign paragraph composer. When an app typesets a paragraph, it can employ whitespace justification (narrowing or widening of spaces betwee

Just a quick unscientific example of how the paragraph composer in InDesign CC 2021 helps with its even most basic default settings. The document was quickly created in InDesign without any tweaks - j

Publisher is used for designing publication with text - and yet the way it put the text together is far from the rules of good graphic design (e.g. rivers with small font and hyphenation). This is a h

8 minutes ago, Oval said:

undesigned text

I don't know what you mean by undesigned text, unless you mean that it is raw, unformatted. My layout philosophy is to prioritize styles, and when that fails, use local formatting, and when that fails, actually insert or alter the text itself. Inserting a non-breaking space would be the last category, and so is my last resort. In Publisher, I end up doing a lot of manual (local) tracking to handle unideal justification. I choose this over inserting a character because the raw text underneath the formatting is still preserved.

In InDesign, I have a whole lot less manual work, and that is, for me at least, the point of this thread. Sure, we could spend a lot of time and get a very similar result in Publisher, but it is not worth the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

those things disrupts future different layouts or other purposes

Having a single-character word like "a" or the many conjunctions and prepositions in Slavic languages locked with the following word is generally a Good Thing™ that you would want to retain in any layout and purpose. As we have already discussed elsewhere. :)

15 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

Sure, we could spend a lot of time and get a very similar result in Publisher, but it is not worth the time.

Well, then use the tool which gets your job done in less time and be happy. I don't see the problem here. My point was that you can make the layout look good in APu as well, it may just need a bit of manual tweaking. I, for one, have no problem with that. That's actually what I see as the fun part of this kind of work. Having everything done by algorithms is so … boring.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garrettm30 said:

I don't know what you mean by undesigned text

The opposite of designed text. Using a philosophy and not using design rules results in typographically unprofessional results. Even if you use a multiline composer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garrettm30 said:

I don't know what you mean by undesigned text

The opposite of designed text. Using a philosophy and not using design rules results in typographically unprofessional results. Even if you use a multiline composer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Oval said:

The opposite of designed text. Using a philosophy and not using design rules results in typographically unprofessional results. Even if you use a multiline composer.

 

9 minutes ago, Oval said:

The opposite of designed text. Using a philosophy and not using design rules results in typographically unprofessional results. Even if you use a multiline composer.

 

 

You could say that again...

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Oval said:

Using a philosophy and not using design rules results in typographically unprofessional results.

That misrepresents what I said. I did not say or intend to imply using a particular philosophy instead of design rules. I merely gave the order of preference I follow in which approach I will use in a given situation to achieve a given output according to design rules. The quality of the end result is always (or nearly always, time- and deadline-permitting) still the end goal. The philosophy is merely the guide toward which approach I work with first. When one approach doesn’t work, move on to the next, and so on. This is the workflow that works best to me.

I get that not everyone likes multiline composers or glyph scaling, but there are a lot of people that do. I don’t think we are arguing that it should be forced on everyone else. Like all feature requests, this thread is a request for the people who perceive a need in this area.

1 hour ago, loukash said:

That’s actually what I see as the fun part of this kind of work. Having everything done by algorithms is so … boring.

You have a unique idea of fun, but I certainly won’t disparage you in that. Different things appeal to different people, no doubt. My preference is that I am not coming to Publisher because I am looking for extra work. There are still plenty things that are more fun about layout that need my attention than micromanaging justification (my opinion; I’m not judging what other people find “fun”).

Here is the bottom-line reality for me: I have been using Publisher more than InDesign lately, and I spend significantly longer working with text in Publisher than I do in similar documents in InDesign, mostly because I am spending a long time working on managing justification line by line.

One might ask why I even use Publisher instead of InDesign when I have access to both and InDesign works for me much faster. I think that is a fair question, and my answer is simply that I am with Publisher more as a matter of principle with an eye toward the future. I feel like I am more aligned with what Serif wants to accomplish and with how they go about doing that than I am with Adobe. For example, I like that I can take part in these forums and that Serif listens. I don’t know if this is accurate or fair, but I don’t feel that Adobe cares at all what I think. I believe Publisher has a bright future, even though there are some things that are not ideal. I can be patient: I know that this is not the only thing yet to accomplish—it’s not even the only thing among my own wish list. I am just suggesting that it should be a focus at some point, not necessarily right away. I would be delighted if it were right away, but I can be realistic. I don’t really want to leave the kind of posts that suggest Publisher is terrible because this is already 2021 and it does not have the feature I want. I don’t think those posts are either fair or helpful.

Now I will say this. If Serif kindly but honestly said that they have no intention to ever work on better automatic justification, then I would have to admit that it never will be the software I am looking for and find something that is. In truth, if they truly felt that way, it would probably be better for me if they actually said it, so that I would not spend my time in Publisher or taking part in a forum for something that wouldn’t work out. But if, as I understand to be the case, that it just takes time because there is still so much to be accomplished, and that they continue making progress as they have been so far, then I am having fun being along for the ride.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm trying to say is this: you cannot expect software users to act like a traditional typesetter, inserting blank metal slabs on a metal plate and manually manipulating the metal-casted letters.

Yes, it is possible to achieve good results in AffPub (no rivers, not overly stretched lines of text, spaces between words that are not disturbing, correct spaces after punctuation marks, etc., optical tracking) - but it is so f... painstakingly time consuming and boring - that you can edit like a few paragraphs. The same amount of time is enough to set up a whole book!

Seriously, one time I spent two hours defining styles, master pages and rules in Indd. It took me some time, but when it was ready - I could flow 400 pages of text and it was somehow ready for print!

When setting a book in Indd my working is more about reading and finding those odd exceptions to the set rules - than about manually correcting anything.

In AffPub, it's about difficult, chaotic and time-consuming struggle with bad-looking text paragraphs.

If any the Dev Guys(and Gals) read it ;D Please understand - you need to learn the rules of good, aesthetic typesetting before designing the algorithm. It is really crucial because many people still use Indd because the text looks better and the job is much easier! If you fix this one thing - it would be like a jewel in a crown! So many people will loose the last argument for using Indd.

In this very subject - don't consult a team of visual artists, but rather hire an old-school graphic designer.

Good luck!

 

ps. and for the .... sake, make a checkbox for removing orphaned conjunctions :D

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only post of mine in this thread was attempting to engage (perhaps bait) Adam T into providing a page from text he believed was well set. Didn't get a response at that time.

Why? Because I have engaged in such challenges amongst various communities--even won a challenge years ago in a LaTeX community using MS Word without any user text overrides. So with ID challenges. In any cases, was the text identically set? Nope. But was it properly, "professionally" set? Yep. Can anyone using application X create instances where application Y cannot set the same text without intervention as well? Sure thing. But that can apply both ways. That's why I insist using a page of published book text complete with supplying a scan of the page in question and everyone use the same frame dimensions, etc.

My feelings about "properly" set text is "workman-like" is good enough. That can be accomplished in just about anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MikeW said:

My feelings about "properly" set text is "workman-like" is good enough. That can be accomplished in just about anything.

I agree with you there; naturally with enough work you could get good results with basically any competent layout engine. My point is that multiline composer usually meets the "good enough" threshold with a whole lot less time spent.

10 minutes ago, MikeW said:

-even won a challenge years ago in a LaTeX community using MS Word without any user text overrides

Even using MS Word? I am very surprised at that. I am not saying you are mistaken or lying, but I am quite amazed. I thought MS Word only works with inter-word spacing, about as basic as it gets, not even capable of using letter spacing for superior result. I am curious: if you were to apply your same skills to do the same job in both Word and something like Publisher, would not your own results in Publisher be superior? I personally would not include Word as a particularly "competent" layout engine. I have always supposed that is not really what its purpose is, but perhaps I am wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

I agree with you there; naturally with enough work you could get good results with basically any competent layout engine. My point is that multiline composer usually meets the "good enough" threshold with a whole lot less time spent. ...

I wasn't referring to setting text, fiddling with it manually, etc. What I did mean is using proper settings to obtain "good enough" results.

30 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

...

Even using MS Word? I am very surprised at that. I am not saying you are mistaken or lying, but I am quite amazed. I thought MS Word only works with inter-word spacing, about as basic as it gets, not even capable of using letter spacing for superior result. I am curious: if you were to apply your same skills to do the same job in both Word and something like Publisher, would not your own results in Publisher be superior? I personally would not include Word as a particularly "competent" layout engine. I have always supposed that is not really what its purpose is, but perhaps I am wrong.

It often isn't a matter of using a "superior" tool. Yes, ID can set text in a generally adequate manner "automatically." However, I rarely use the paragraph composer. Depending on the font, font size, etc., it can make a mash of letters. I.e., it can set the text poorly. Very few layout people I personally know actually turn on paragraph composer for that reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I do believe it is a worthy exercise to, when reading a book and run across a page of pleasing, well-set text, to scan it, OCR it or type it out. Then measure the width an reset it in a number of applications. Tweak the spacing settings as desired, but do not make local changes. And if the original text isn't hyphenated, shut off hyphenation settings.

Then print the newly composed page and compare. I usually do so on a light table and even overlay them looking at the differences.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, garrettm30 said:

The quality of the end result is always (or nearly always, time- and deadline-permitting) still the end goal.

But “without changing the text stream itself” it is impossible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Oval said:

But “without changing the text stream itself” it is impossible.

That is not true. But perhaps my terminology is not clear. What I meant here by “text stream” is that if you copy and paste it in another app as raw text, the raw text should be identical. That is, no changed or added characters.

If all we are talking about is adjusting justification, then it is not necessary to insert or change characters. Instead, we can use things such as tracking, which is format rather than characters. That is, after all, what automatic justification is doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick unscientific example of how the paragraph composer in InDesign CC 2021 helps with its even most basic default settings. The document was quickly created in InDesign without any tweaks - just default settings. Then saved as IDML and opened in Publisher 1.9, beta 452.

  1. First row InDesign
  2. Second row Publisher, default settings, as is
  3. Third row Publisher with "prevent widowed first lines" ticked
  • 1. Notice the tightly composed and well balanced boxes of text (inDesign)
  • 2. Notice the widowed first line in second box (Publisher)
  • 3. Notice the sudden white blank area in box one bottom part - entire lines moved - no balancing of content performed (It looks horrible) (Publisher)

You can waste half your life tweaking, fixing and "debugging" layout in simple or buggy software. I retired PagePlus and skipped Publisher for some minor documents made in a professional context (I used PagePlus just to try some other programs and add spice to my work life). Ten years later I just haven't got time for unnecessary tweaking or software shortcomings. Publisher is not a candidate for my work until it actively helps me.

Deadline close, knee deep in minor issues like 2. and 3..... no thank you. Never again.

So before Serif makes their own paragraph composer engine - I'll pass on Publisher. But I cannot imagine they won't. I would be delighted to participate in the work if I was them. It is not just adding buttons and straightforward to understand features to the product. Trying to add aesthetics, balance, automatic solving of classic minor issues and "layout wisdom" to software sounds more interesting than much I have tried and heard of for a long time. 

And... it can really really be seen when it works. Pages just look... natural. Pleasing.

indesign.png.ed92cd43b1f44367ffc5fea4de1178ab.png

  • "The user interface is supposed to work for me - I am not supposed to work for the user interface."
  • Computer-, operating system- and software agnostic; I am a result oriented professional. Look for a fanboy somewhere else.
  • “When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger.” ― Confucius
  • Not an Affinity user og forum user anymore. The software continued to disappoint and not deliver.
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2021 at 2:21 AM, garrettm30 said:

no changed or added characters

You wrote that you are “inserting a non-breaking space”, which is a change.

On 2/13/2021 at 2:21 AM, garrettm30 said:

That is not true. But perhaps my terminology is not clear. What I meant here by “text stream” is that if you copy and paste it in another app as raw text, the raw text should be identical. That is, no changed or added characters.

Impossible to achieve high-quality justified/centered text without changing the text.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this must be a challenge for the developer team - but there are hundreds of possible ways of employing AI into the process.

For example,  by analyzing the rough graphical form of the paragraph - like aligning not words but objects.

Secondly, by applying machine learning - designers could use their skills to "train" the algorithm to automate actions done by the users.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Oval said:

You wrote that you are “inserting a non-breaking space”, which is a change.

 

That is true that it is a change, which was my entire point. But what I wrote was that inserting a non-breaking space is a last resort that I try to avoid. If I can achieve what I need to with another way, I do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, garrettm30 said:

That is true that it is a change, which was my entire point.

So it is is not true that it is not true … But what is your secret? How do you achieve justified/centered text without changing the text? The only solution we xould imagine is “Text Wrap”, which is not really professional.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Oval said:

So it is is not true that it is not true …

At this point, I'm just not following what you're getting at.

14 minutes ago, Oval said:

But what is your secret? How do you achieve justified/centered text without changing the text?

I haven't been saying anything about centered text, but for justified text, it is as I said before: 

On 2/12/2021 at 7:21 PM, garrettm30 said:

If all we are talking about is adjusting justification, then it is not necessary to insert or change characters. Instead, we can use things such as tracking, which is format rather than characters. That is, after all, what automatic justification is doing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oval said:

show an example, how something works that is impossible

No, actually, I do not think continuing this line of discussion further is productive for the purpose of this thread. I’m pretty sure, after you have been around long enough for well over 2000 posts, that you know how tracking works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • 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.