Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Publisher: scaling a picture frame's content by percentage


Recommended Posts

Hello, excuse me if this has been answered already, I coudn't find the answer (maybe I didn't use the right keywords for my search). But anyway, I'm struggling with something in Publisher: when I use a picture frame tool and then populate it with an image, I am allowed to scale my image within the frame if I want to zoom in or out. I can use a slider below the picture frame to do that, but the slider jumps to certain percentages. Like, 36.4% and the next option I'm getting is 40%. But what if I want to scale my image at 38%? How can I do that and is that even possible at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Dan 11300 said:

I'm sorry, but I can't find this dialog box when I select the picture frame with the move-tool. (version 1.85)

Do you have an image in the frame?

To save time I am currently using an automated AI to reply to some posts on this forum. If any of "my" posts are wrong or appear to be total b*ll*cks they are the ones generated by the AI. If correct they were probably mine. I apologise for any mistakes made by my AI - I'm sure it will improve with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are using a Linked document file not an image file

Things may be different (no time to check all variations right now)

To save time I am currently using an automated AI to reply to some posts on this forum. If any of "my" posts are wrong or appear to be total b*ll*cks they are the ones generated by the AI. If correct they were probably mine. I apologise for any mistakes made by my AI - I'm sure it will improve with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done several tests and it does not work with Affinity Photo "images". Whether the images are linked or embedded doesn't change anything.
Iit's a pity not to be able to use this function with images from Photo.

The best way to predict the futur, is to design it (R. Fuller)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Seems I've got the same problem as @Dan 11300, there's no "Picture Frame"-box to alter the percentage of an image, just a "Page-Box dropdown-menu"... The image was linked, tried to build a document with embedded image, same problem. Some advise would be nice.

 

 

#######

EDIT

#######

Found (a temporary) solution, installed publisher ßeta 1.9, there's a different approach to placing an image with the required percentage! ;-)

Screen Shot 2020-12-27 at 15.06.19.png

Screen Shot 2020-12-27 at 15.09.19.png

Screen Shot 2020-12-27 at 15.23.35.png

Edited by RuudKuin
Found solution, ßeta 1.9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/15/2020 at 5:11 AM, Dan 11300 said:

I have done several tests and it does not work with Affinity Photo "images". Whether the images are linked or embedded doesn't change anything.
Iit's a pity not to be able to use this function with images from Photo.

That's because they're not images; they're documents. Images are PNG, JPEG, or TIFF files.

But the capabilities available with documents may change in the future.

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

That's because they're not images; they're documents. Images are PNG, JPEG, or TIFF files.

Thanks Walt!
So, PSD's are documents, otherwise they're images?
Should PSD's be saved as i.e. TIFF?
After that images could be scaled properly, with a percentage?

 

#####

EDIT

#####

Yes! THAT IS IT! Walt, that's great, thanks man!
I've been saving/exporting images as PSD/AFPHOTO-files every time, hence the lack of possibilities to scale...

Screen Shot 2020-12-27 at 16.30.47.png

Edited by RuudKuin
Found solution, an image is not a document and vice versa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RuudKuin said:

Should PSD's be saved as i.e. TIFF?
After that images could be scaled properly, with a percentage?

Right. At least until 1.9, which has improved the handling and allows the scaling for document files, too.

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@walt.farrell You're a lifesaver Walt, since I've started migrating from that other Suite, slowly but surely starting to find my way through the discrepancies between Publisher and InDesign. If you hadn't mentioned the difference between 'images' and 'documents', it would've been a long search for me, before finding this being the reason for not showing a percentage in the upper left corner of the toolbar. Thanks again! Glad there's such great feedback and help in here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Silly question of terminology for us inDesign users trying to migrate over. Is "Placed DPI" what inDesign refers to as "Effective PPI" in their links panel?

I can't thank Affinity enough for making percentages a priority! And I know that this is a nitpick, but I have always had an issue with people using DPI (Dots Per Inch) instead of PPI (Pixels Per Inch.) It's something that I've always stressed to students. It's like when people call the name treatment on a magazine cover a masthead instead of a nameplate. Does conflating these two terms lightly irk anyone else or do I stand alone in my crazy?

Again, thank you so much! I look forward to using Publisher more this year!

All the best!

Stephen :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, segts said:

but I have always had an issue with people using DPI (Dots Per Inch) instead of PPI (Pixels Per Inch.) It's something that I've always stressed to students. It's like when people call the name treatment on a magazine cover a masthead instead of a nameplate. Does conflating these two terms lightly irk anyone else or do I stand alone in my crazy?

You will find some people here who agree with you. And others who don't care, or perhaps not very strongly.

The last time I saw this discussion I checked several applications on my system, including Windows itself, and found a fairly even mixture of using DPI or PPI for images. And that reminded me of dictionaries, and two schools of lexicography that I learned about when I was younger:

  • Prescriptive, where the dictionaries they produce prescribe how language and words should be used.
  • Descriptive, where the dictionaries describe the way that language and words are actually used, thus accounting for the evolution of language usage.

 

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@walt.farrell I know it's probably more me than anything. You are right that many people do say DPI. I think "Placed DPI" makes sense since Publisher is mostly for print. And then you have to apples-to-apples the language under "Original DPI" so people understand the correlation. It just makes ears sting, like when people interchange "good" and "well."

I am just so glad to have percentages and "Placed DPI." It makes it so much easier to say goodby to inDesign! Now if we can just get Designer to export Pantone in their EPS files, I would be over the moon! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, segts said:

Now if we can just get Designer to export Pantone in their EPS files, I would be over the moon!

I would not expect that Serif invests more love into EPS handling, but who knows. Any arguments using a PDF placed Passthrough? A proper PDF would keep the spot colours.

------
Windows 10 | i5-8500 CPU | Intel UHD 630 Graphics | 32 GB RAM | Latest Retail and Beta versions of complete Affinity range installed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Joachim_L said:

I would not expect that Serif invests more love into EPS handling, but who knows. Any arguments using a PDF placed Passthrough? A proper PDF would keep the spot colours.

That is a good question. I stopped using export as PDF for Designer a while ago because the export would add tons of nodes to shapes and make them impossible to edit in another program. I think they have improved that. This was back in the beginning. Also, the PDF rasterizes any vector effects which loses the file's resolution independence. I wish that vendors would start using Designer, but most require AI or EPS files. For me, making swag items like enamel pins or t-shirt designs is so much easier in Designer, but I always have to take the extra step and take the files over to Illustrator to correct the Pantone colors. I will definitely try using the the PDF export again and see if that works!

THX!

Stephen :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, segts said:

lso, the PDF rasterizes any vector effects which loses the file's resolution independence.

You can choose the option to "Rasterize Nothing" which will stop the rasterization by omitting those items. Doesn't EPS export remove them, anyway?

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, walt.farrell said:

You can choose the option to "Rasterize Nothing" which will stop the rasterization by omitting those items. Doesn't EPS export remove them, anyway?

Yeah, my EPS exports are just for simple files like logos, t-shirt designs or enamel pins, Things that are "flat." It is good to know that you can omit any effect though. I think where the effects rasterizing can be weird is with subtle text drop shadows.

Since I guess Adobe owns the PDF architecture, a lot of the effect like drop shadows are not rasterized BC the files have native programing. This makes it easy to import a PDF as into an InDesign layout and scale the size of it without worrying about resolution. In the past some blend modes in Designer PDFs have shown wonky results. I couple years ago I made a tie using Designer but when I exported the file for the vendor, all of the complex shape overlays and blend modes were too much for the PDF to handle. I ultimately exported as an image and it worked perfectly. Again, they have probably improved the PDF export since I last tried. It has been two years 😀 

My files are usually two thing, wildly oversized and needlessly complex 🙃

Attached is what the tie ended up looking like!

Best!

Stephen :)

 

PXL_20210701_124250572.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, segts said:

call the name treatment on a magazine cover a masthead instead of a nameplate

Isn't the name of a magazine rather its title? 🤓

While title vs. imprint have quite different content (more like 1 vs. many) the difference between PPI and DPI is much more subtle (<-tiny) and doesn't seem to matter or harm in practical use (-> irrelevant).

macOS 10.14.6 | MacBookPro Retina 15" | Eizo 27" | Affinity V1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Isn't the name of a magazine rather its title? 🤓

While title vs. imprint have quite different content (more like 1 vs. many) the difference between PPI and DPI is much more subtle (<-tiny) and doesn't seem to matter or harm in practical use (-> irrelevant).

Language is definitely tricky and there are so many variations based on where you live. Personally, I love that my Aussie friend refers to tater tots as potato gems. I wish that's a term that would catch on in the states. I think I just get hung up on dots vs. pixels. And again, I definitely think it is more me being literal than the rest of the world being incorrect. :)

S:)

Link to comment
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

Terms of Use | 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.