Jump to content
VirginiaL

[BUG?] Publisher - Error on viewing and exporting pdf

Recommended Posts

Hi you all,

I linked a file into my Affinity file. It is an architectural plan, with a dashed border as frame. I linked it in my document, but - this and other - has an error of visualizations. Lines continues outside the border. But opening the linked file: it isn't so.

It is not only visible in the preview, but in the exporting pdf also.

Thanks in advance,

Best

V

1.jpg

01.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which file format do the linked files use? Can you post any of them as an example? Is the clipping problem (objects extending beyond the dashed border) the only one, or are there other rendering problems?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is again the fault of Publisher and how it handles PDF. The sample file provided looks perfect in Indesign but as VirginiaL said in Publisher lots of extras that should not be there. Publisher wants to make PDF's editable, be it for text or vector and I am sure this is again causing another problem. I would stay clear of Publisher for placing PDF's, there are just too many potential issues at the moment. If you do need to place it in Publisher I would recommend converting to high res JPEG or some other flattened image. You lose all editing capabilities of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The major problem for Affinity apps is of course their incapability to pass through EPS, AI and PDF so they always need to open these files. This causes risks (rendering errors, replaced fonts, etc.) that are often unbearable in commercial production and especially when placing files received from third parties.

On the other hand, Affinity apps do pretty good job opening and interpreting PDF files (though not as good as e.g. Xara, that can open this specific file without problems, and automatically also install the missing Google fonts, if necessary). 

If this project is in your own hands and you are willing to resolve the problem, I'd try the following: for each PDF that fails, open the source file and check the exact measure of the dash-line bounding box. E.g., for the file you posted, it is 282,1 x 194,6 mm. Or just create the rectangle and make it the proper size manually, if the sizes vary greatly and the job cannot be serialized. Create a rectangle of that size in a Publisher document where you wish to place the PDF, then mask the imported PDF with the rectangle. This hides the overflown (misdrawn) part of the original drawing. I did not check whether failure to use the clipping path was the only problem with this file, but if it was, this way you could include your plans in your Publisher publication without needing to convert them to bitmaps (= much worse choice, especially if you are preparing a publication to be viewed digitally).

arch_plan.jpg.7407250785d3b25591c9ace6f060cef2.jpg

Here is a Publisher document that does the job:

arch_plan.afpub

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both!

Since I work a lot with pdfs, if I can give a feedback, this is a serious issue that Affinity team should face. At least the possibility, with a checking box, to decide if it has only to "read" or read and modify pdfs as you say.

It is a lot of hours of work more indeed in this way.

 

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VirginiaL said:

Thank you both!

Since I work a lot with pdfs, if I can give a feedback, this is a serious issue that Affinity team should face. At least the possibility, with a checking box, to decide if it has only to "read" or read and modify pdfs as you say.

It is a lot of hours of work more indeed in this way.

 

Thank you

I agree and people have been saying this since beta and asking for the ability to place the PDF without editing.

I would disagree with Lagarto, Affinity does not do a good job interpreting PDF's, it only does a "good" job if all the pieces are there and correct. If you place Virginias PDF in Illustrator you can edit and it and it shows exactly how you see in the PDF, only does it show what Publisher shows when you start ripping it apart and clearing clipping masks. Beating a dead horse here but Publisher needs the ability to not embedded and not make the PDF edible. If they really want to get into PDF editing I would suggest they make an Acrobat DC competitor. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, wonderings said:

I would disagree with Lagarto, Affinity does not do a good job interpreting PDF's,

It is all relative. Affinity Publisher can open a 100 page PDF with flowing text, complex notations with practically zero artifacts while apps like QuarkXPress show thousands of artifacts and "useless" bounding boxes. But for complex single page artworks there is nothing that can beat Illustrator. If I need to save a big project from a PDF, the source of which I no longer have (e.g. InDesign document), there is probably no better tool available than Affinity Publisher to do that and remake it a publication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Lagarto said:

It is all relative. Affinity Publisher can open a 100 page PDF with flowing text, complex notations with practically zero artifacts while apps like QuarkXPress show thousands of artifacts and "useless" bounding boxes. But for complex single page artworks there is nothing that can beat Illustrator. If I need to save a big project from a PDF, the source of which I no longer have (e.g. InDesign document), there is probably no better tool available than Affinity Publisher to do that and remake it a publication.

Do people still use Quark? 😉 Quark has never been good for display, when I switched our shop over to Indesign years ago it was like moving from the stone age to the Jetsons. You can actually see what you are working on, full resolution and it works at the same speed as Quark! Visually Affinity is the same way, looks great, just not trustworthy with placed PDF's in it. 

I know Quark is still out there and updating, I have a a demo installed but never get around to trying anything in it so cannot compare Publisher to Quark. Quark does have years and years and years of refinement and development behind it, it was the app of choice by all print shops till Adobe took them on. I would not discount Quark, I am sure it is still very robust and hopefully looks prettier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, wonderings said:

Quark has never been good for display,

My point was in comparing page layout apps that can open and edt (multipage) PDF content and make it native = recreate it as a publication, that is, apps like Affinity Publisher, Xara Designer Pro and QuarkXPress. There are probably other but which I do not know, but of these three, Affinity Publisher is most versatile and capable (in this sole task) even if it renders some jobs erroneously. .

QuarkXPress of course can handle pass through without any problems and is probably the only true alternative to InDesign in professional use (where jobs typically vary greatly and can be anything up to complex books containing thousands of pages).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lagarto said:

My point was in comparing page layout apps that can open and edt (multipage) PDF content and make it native = recreate it as a publication, that is, apps like Affinity Publisher, Xara Designer Pro and QuarkXPress. There are probably other but which I do not know, but of these three, Affinity Publisher is most versatile and capable (in this sole task) even if it renders some jobs erroneously. .

QuarkXPress of course can handle pass through without any problems and is probably the only true alternative to InDesign in professional use (where jobs typically vary greatly and can be anything up to complex books containing thousands of pages).

Had no idea Quark had PDF editing capabilities. I am ok with the feature as long as a pass through option is given. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wonderings said:

I am ok with the feature as long as a pass through option is given. 

Yes, but sadly it is not. That makes Affinity Publisher very limited, but it has some very good features and uses. Hopefully passthrough comes one day... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, wonderings said:

Had no idea Quark had PDF editing capabilities.

Actually I think direct opening of a multpage PDF document is still just a planned feature. But you can import a multipage PDF with a script or extension and then convert the pages to native objects. But it is nothing like opening directly a PDF as a document in Xara Designer Pro or Affinity Publisher. But I consider this feature more a rescue job, or a transfer project (if IDML is not available) rather than something to be used in regular production in lack of PDF pass through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lagarto said:

It is all relative. Affinity Publisher can open a 100 page PDF with flowing text, complex notations with practically zero artifacts while apps like QuarkXPress show thousands of artifacts and "useless" bounding boxes. ...

Though QXP does open the OP's pdf for editing just fine without "artifacts and useless bounding boxes."

QXP can open a multipage pdf and convert it to a native format without any add-on (via a shipped Javascript)--but I still use a 3rd-part, inexpensive XTension anyway.

Capture_000567.png.19b44925e4ea53761f19cae0fb8434d5.png

You forgot CD as to applications that open pdfs, single page or otherwise. I would also add that even Adobe says the absolute wrong application to use for editing pdfs is Illustrator. It's actually not good at the task.

Share this post


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

You forgot CD as to applications that open pdfs, single page or otherwise

Oh yes, true. It does it reasonably well. It is just that I have never used CorelDRAW for multipage jobs so for me it has always been comparable to Illustrator (or Designer) -- not actually a page layout app even if marketed to some extent as one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah. Before Corel did away with Ventura Publisher, they would have never dreamed about advertising CD as a page layout application. I have used it for brochures up to 16-24 pages because of the content even when VP was an active product, but it is never a choice I would typically make. But then again, I know people doing books with it--and a few people using XDP, too. Masochistic behavior!

Share this post


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

Though QXP does open the OP's pdf for editing just fine without "artifacts and useless bounding boxes."

I was referring to something like this (more specifically, as mentioned, related to notation):

a) QXP 2018 (Useful bounding boxes -- just try to color the glyphs):

sibelius_notation_qxp.jpg.122342d03b9808d2c2cba10a7c2f1f51.jpgsibelius_notation_qxp_fillassigned.jpg.812bb4a32f6c4652305f0462e20ba3ff.jpg

sibelius_notation_qxp_glyphs.jpg.38a1ad346397ab95ac12bf62f7b86337.jpg

b) Affinity Publisher (not a single meaningless object: select all, assign fill):

sibelius_notation_apub_fillassigned.jpg.326f1595fc12ab0652b12af285d628c9.jpg

I'm not saying this at all to diss QXP,  but just as an example that each app has their strong and weak points. Affinity Publisher is very good at this. You can have hundred pages of this and it is light, fast and each glyph is correctly rendered and easy to access. It's like a day and night compared to QXP. But then again, Publisher can completely mess up notation PDF created by another software. Or do silly things like with the OP's document.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lagarto said:

I was referring to something like this (more specifically, as mentioned, related to notation):

a) QXP 2018 (Useful bounding boxes -- just try to color the glyphs):

b) Affinity Publisher (not a single meaningless object: select all, assign fill):

I'm not saying this at all to diss QXP,  but just as an example that each app has their strong and weak points. Affinity Publisher is very good at this. You can have hundred pages of this and it is light, fast and each glyph is correctly rendered and easy to access. It's like a day and night compared to QXP. But then again, Publisher can completely mess up notation PDF created by another software. Or do silly things like with the OP's document.

No worries. My list of issues may be longer than yours for any given application...

As far as qxp as you show, two things. the import is still grouped. The context for what gets filled is set to the text boxes, etc. Other than those two things, I would need both the pdf and font(s) to take a look.

That said, every application has strengths/weaknesses. That is one reason I have always, always, bought and maintained multiple applications.

Share this post


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

The context for what gets filled is set to the text boxes, etc.

Yes, true, is it still true in 2019 version that I need to have the Text tool to access content of the text box, and can do so only one text box at a time?

1 hour ago, MikeW said:

But then again, I know people doing books with it--and a few people using XDP, too. Masochistic behavior

Indeed. XDP is an interesting package, a kind of a Swiss army knife, but I guess I would cut myself badly if I had to use if for anything bigger than a leaflet. Yet it does open pretty well long PDF documents.

scarborough_from_sibelius.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lagarto said:

Yes, true, is it still true in 2019 version that I need to have the Text tool to access content of the text box, and can do so only one text box at a time? ...

You can likely use f/r to target the used fonts to change their color.

But as in all things pdf, best to use the originating applications to make such changes and place in an application with pdf passthrough...

Share this post


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

But as in all things pdf, best to use the originating applications to make such changes and place in an application with pdf passthrough...

Sure. But as you mentioned, it is good to have all these things in the tool pack.

I got a while ago an ad created in InDesign CS5.5 (by third party ad agency) which the advertizer asked me to edit a bit for the latest issue of a magazine for which we do layout. Illustrator CS6 could not render it correctly (even installed fonts were not recognized correctly). I had to bother my colleague who had the latest CC version installed, but it did not do any better, but he managed to fix the thing using VectorFirstAid. Interestingly, I recently opened the same ad with Affinity Publisher and it rendered it perfectly, and I just opened it with Xara Designer Pro, and the same there. QXP 2018 does it similarly as Illustrator. Bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xara applications, which any more I'm using XP&GD, has been my main pdf editing tool in your example for many years. (Well, design application too.) But depending upon the change needed, I may convert type to curves and change things in a second Q layout, export and place in the main layout. 

Share this post


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

Xara applications, which any more I'm using XP&GD

I added the "Pro" because I had to get the full package to get the "Pro" (= "Pub") features working e.g. with Finnish spell checking (the "two-package" has the all too familiar "cripple" features to encourage one to add the third app in the package :-)  It is the 1(.)7th generation package don't know developed for how many decades, and it sure shows, but it has done its A-levels well, passed through the Corel phase to have integrated solid PS interpretation including font embedding ,and vector stuff like Blend tool, etc. I don't get distracted by the history and do not care about pixel polishing, but sensible UI is always welcome ;-)   

Share this post


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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. 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.