BUG? Picture frame does not retain setting when replacing image

[postmadesign]

I have been playing around trying to figure out how to convert some InDesign documents to Publisher. Although the conversion works really quite well, there are certainly some bugs, especially with placed images. I got frequent crashes when replacing images, and they are generally not correctly sized and sometimes squished.

Now that I had set up the spread as I wanted, I wanted to test if it would work in a real world situation: I have the same basic spread but the content (graphs, tables etc.) have to be changed. What I ran into immediately is that Publisher does not retain the customized placement of the image when I replace it. I replaced both Designer files as well as EPS files, but in both cases I have to manually rescale and position the image each time. The files that I replace the images with are exactly the same dimensions, so this can not be the problem. It just seems to reset the picture frame each time. This is of course very annoying and gives a lot of unneccesary work. Is this some kind of bug, as I can not see why this would be intended behaviour?

[fde101]

I believe those are considered properties of the image rather than of the frame.  When you replace the image, it is a different image so those properties no longer apply...  they were replaced along with the old image.

[Seneca]

2 hours ago, postmadesign said:

Publisher does not retain the customized placement of the image when I replace it.

I would most certainly consider it a bug. If I crate a template document and then update it with a new picture I want the new picture to obey the rules of the frame and not the other way around.

[fde101]

I think that depends on whether using a setting that automatically scales to fit the frame, vs. a manual scale.  If the original image was scaled or positioned manually that could be a different story from one that is set to scale to fit or fill the frame.

If the image is manually scaled/positioned, then its scale/position is that of the image layer which is separate from the frame itself, so if you are replacing that layer it makes sense that the position and scale of the old layer would not carry over.  It might not be the most optimal behavior, but it might not be a bug either.

[postmadesign]

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

I think that depends on whether using a setting that automatically scales to fit the frame, vs. a manual scale.  If the original image was scaled or positioned manually that could be a different story from one that is set to scale to fit or fill the frame.

If the image is manually scaled/positioned, then its scale/position is that of the image layer which is separate from the frame itself, so if you are replacing that layer it makes sense that the position and scale of the old layer would not carry over.  It might not be the most optimal behavior, but it might not be a bug either.

I guess all I can say is that this way of working came from InDesign, where the picture frame dictated the image, and images of similar dimensions would be placed the same. I hope this can be the case in Publisher as well, because it just makes sense. In that sense I do not agree with your second statement: for me the frame determines how an image is placed, not the other way around.

[fde101]

18 minutes ago, postmadesign said:

I do not agree with your second statement: for me the frame determines how an image is placed, not the other way around.

In InDesign, the picture and the frame are most likely the same "object" as they are in QuarkXPress, so in that context the positioning of the image would be intertwined with the concept of the frame.

Publisher is different in that the image and the frame are two separate objects represented as two separate layers on the Layers panel.  You can drag an image layer out of its frame and the position is retained, which implies that the position of the image is not a property of the frame, but of the actual image layer.

You can similarly drag an image layer into a frame from within the Layers panel.

Different program, different design, different behavior.

 

Having said all of that, it is not unreasonable to request that when replacing an image within a frame Publisher adapt the properties of the incoming image to those of the one that it is replacing within the frame (as I would expect it to do if the frame is set to scale to fit or scale to fill)...  but that doesn't change the very likely probability that the scale and position of a manually placed/sized image is a property of the image and not of the frame.  They are two different layers and each layer in the products has its own size and position; there is no reason why these would be any different.

[MikeW]

ID & QXP use a vector container which has various attributes associated with them. So do all other applications I use, with APub being an exception. 

[000]

17 minutes ago, MikeW said:

APub being an exception

Publisher can actually do both: You can use container if you want, just draw up the image box (a clipping mask / clipping container) first and then place the image inside (there is a picture  frame tool in the toolbar) — just when you place an image directly from a file or paste it from the clipboard, it is imported ,barebone'.

[MikeW]

3 minutes ago, Jens Krebs said:

Publisher can actually do both: You can use container if you want, just draw up the image box (a clipping mask / clipping container) first and then place the image inside (there is a picture  frame tool in the toolbar) — just when you place an image directly from a file or paste it from the clipboard, it is imported ,barebone'.

The thread is about what happens when an image is replaced and APub not handling as per other applications for the noted reasons. In fact, it's a pita to replace images.

[fde101]

My vote (only pretending that I actually have one) is for the current behavior when manipulating the layers on the Layers panel to be retained, but for the image to be matched to the boundaries of the old image (adjusted by some method X for a difference in aspect ratio) when replacing one by dragging into the frame from outside the application, when pasting an image from the clipboard, or when explicitly using the "place" feature.

I think that probably makes the most sense from a user perspective in most cases?

 

Maybe have a preference to instead center the new image on the boundaries of the old one and match the placed DPI instead of the boundaries...

[nwhit]

8 hours ago, postmadesign said:

I have been playing around trying to figure out how to convert some InDesign documents to Publisher. Although the conversion works really quite well, there are certainly some bugs, especially with placed images. I got frequent crashes when replacing images, and they are generally not correctly sized and sometimes squished.

Now that I had set up the spread as I wanted, I wanted to test if it would work in a real world situation: I have the same basic spread but the content (graphs, tables etc.) have to be changed. What I ran into immediately is that Publisher does not retain the customized placement of the image when I replace it. I replaced both Designer files as well as EPS files, but in both cases I have to manually rescale and position the image each time. The files that I replace the images with are exactly the same dimensions, so this can not be the problem. It just seems to reset the picture frame each time. This is of course very annoying and gives a lot of unneccesary work. Is this some kind of bug, as I can not see why this would be intended behaviour?

Also be aware that there is a reported bug regarding pics/graphics coming in via IDML import not showing correctly, even after fixing, saving and reopening the file. You can read about it in a post on this forum and it is being worked on. Hopefully will be fixed in the next beta.

 

[thomaso]

On 12/11/2019 at 11:49 AM, postmadesign said:

Publisher does not retain the customized placement of the image when I replace it. I replaced (...) I have to manually rescale and position the image each time. The files that I replace the images with are exactly the same dimensions, so this can not be the problem. It just seems to reset the picture frame each time.

This disturbance occurs to me with JPGs in native AfPub documents (= no IDLM conversion). But not with every image replace action; unfortunately I couldn't detect yet in what situations it behaves that unwanted way. – However, according to Callum's respond this property change within a picture frame is not APub's expected behavior.

https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/103051-linked-image-update-command/

 

[Patrick Connor]

Sorry.

Thank you for reporting a problem using the pre 1.8.0 beta builds. It appears that a member of the Affinity QA team didn't get round to fully investigating this specific report posted in the bugs forums. We are very sorry for this oversight. Yours is one of a number of reports that I am posting this apology to, using an automated script. 

Now we have released 1.8.3 on all platforms containing many hundreds of bug fixes, and we hope your problem has already been fully addressed. If you still have this problem in the 1.8.3 release build, then the QA team would really appreciate you reporting again it in the relevant Bugs forum.

• Report a Bug in Affinity Designer
• Report a Bug in Affinity Photo
• Report a Bug in Affinity Publisher

Each of those links above contains instructions how best to report a bug to us. If that is what you already did in this thread just copy paste your original report into a new thread. We appreciate all the information that you have including sample files and screen shots to help us replicate your problem.

This thread has now been locked as the QA team are not following the threads to which this automatic reply is made, which is why we would appreciate a new bug report if you are still have this problem in the release build.