Publisher 1.9 sometimes imports photos rotated

[kanihoncho]

I have a vertical format photo that publisher repeatedly 1.9 places in a -90˚ orientation . . . photo 1.9 opens it just fine. When I rotate the photo it retains the horizontal borders cutting off the picture

[kanihoncho]

I opened the photo in question and saved it as a png. Now it imports in the right orientation. problem solved . . .

[loukash]

^ No solution yet, but some JPEGs in portrait mode seem to be unaffected.

54 minutes ago, kanihoncho said:

When I rotate the photo it retains the horizontal borders cutting off the picture

You may want to use Layer > Convert To Image Frame for easier photo manipulation.

[kanihoncho]

What is was is that Publisher doesn't allow you to see a certain amount above and below the page like Adobe apps do . . . you don't get to use the entire "pasteboard" to hold items . . .

[loukash]

55 minutes ago, kanihoncho said:

Publisher doesn't allow you to see a certain amount above and below the page

Yeah, that's especially confusing as there's no visible divider between the spreads whatsoever.

[3joern]

15 hours ago, loukash said:

^ No solution yet, but some JPEGs in portrait mode seem to be unaffected.

it seems that the Exif data is not read correctly. If you re-save it in a photo program, the EXIF data is overwritten. But when you make a catalog with hundreds of images you have to rotate all the images manually by yourself, this time cost I can Invest in Adobe   😜  (what I don't prefer)

[Joachim_L]

7 minutes ago, 3joern said:

this time cost I can Invest in Adobe

Do not say this A-word here. Hopefully Serif will fix this matter, which occurs mostly with images from mobiles. You can do a lossless rotation (even in a batch) with IrfanView.

[loukash]

Just now, Joachim_L said:

You can do a lossless rotation (even in a batch) with IrfanView.

Outside APu, the images are rotated correctly.
Also, as I posted in the other thread, not all images seem to be affected. Portrait view photos I made with my 2004 Olympus µ-mini are placed correctly. I don't remember if originally I'd rotate them manually though – usually losslessly via GraphicConverter – but I can make a few fresh photos to test it again. Will have to charge the battery first, haven't used it in quite some time…

[Joachim_L]

1 minute ago, loukash said:

Outside APu, the images are rotated correctly.

Never intended Serif NOT to blame. Definitely a flaw at their side. I can only guess that Serif is only looking at Exif tag Orientation.

[loukash]

25 minutes ago, loukash said:

not all images seem to be affected. Portrait view photos I made with my 2004 Olympus µ-mini are placed correctly. I don't remember if originally I'd rotate them manually though – usually losslessly via GraphicConverter – but I can make a few fresh photos to test it again.

Alright, as it turns out, my "vintage" µ-mini couldn't rotate by itself yet. So obviously I'd rotate all portrait images myself losslessly via GraphicConverter before importing them into iPhoto. And that's why they now import correctly into Publisher, unlike all the other auto-rotated images from my iPhone and Canon.

[3joern]

I've checked my images from different cameras, Canon 5d MKII & MKI, 40d, 300d, ixus, iPhone newSE, 6, 4… all the same, don't rotate right.

Fortunately if you rotate it by yourself in Publisher (in a image Box), then after finish the first Layout phase and you optimize the image in a other Applications, the Ressource Manager don't rotate it again.

[loukash]

31 minutes ago, 3joern said:

in a image Box

Image frames are an important factor anyway, too often being overlooked as it seems. At first I was also confused as to "why doesn't it work the same as in ID?!"

[3joern]

9 minutes ago, loukash said:

Image frames are an important factor anyway, too often being overlooked as it seems. At first I was also confused as to "why doesn't it work the same as in ID?!"

this drives me always crazy, not only Indesign, also in Quark is this a standard that I used over 25 years and I'am always open for new better solutions, but the image behavior in Publisher is way far from fast and intuitiv. I really like the automatic properties in an image box, but when I must rotate the image because the EFIX is interpreted wrong then also the automatic benefit is gone 😭

still can't use Publisher in my professional productive environment (it's so sad) but I play with it for my family Photo book to test the progress. I have a book project coming up about a European Photo Prize competition and I wish I could try this with Publisher and show it to the others on the editorial team who have the same opinion about Adobe. But unfortunately the program is not yet ready for me to tackle such a large project.

[kanihoncho]

I'm not happy with Serif's progress on any of these apps. Charge me more but hire some more people and let's get these apps cranking! I'm gonna die soon!

[Joachim_L]

3 minutes ago, kanihoncho said:

I'm gonna die soon!

Oh no! My sincerest compassion!

[3joern]

6 minutes ago, kanihoncho said:

I'm not happy with Serif's progress on any of these apps. Charge me more but hire some more people and let's get these apps cranking! I'm gonna die soon!

not necessarily, there are also many positive developments that I find very good. I've been able to productively tackle customer projects with the designer for a few years now. I just have very high hopes for Publisher. But the basis has to be right. And let's be honest, at this price, it's all still within the acceptable range. I am looking forward to what is coming.

[loukash]

1 minute ago, 3joern said:

the image behavior in Publisher is way far from fast and intuitiv

But we're also still stuck in the "it's a page layout app only" mindset!
But that's not all what Publisher is about, as you can have pixel layers and edit them natively within the Photo Persona. That's essentially a Good Thing™. However, it would be nice to have an option if you want to import your photos as plain pixel layers or directly into a Picture Frame. I think the new Merge Data mode goes into that direction, but I've downgraded back to 1.8.4 until just one day toying with v1.9. so I haven't played with it yet.

7 minutes ago, 3joern said:

also in Quark is this a standard that I used over 25 years

My first DTP experience goes back to Aldus PageMaker 3 on a Macintosh SE/30 in a public University library in 1989…

12 minutes ago, 3joern said:

still can't use Publisher in my professional productive environment (it's so sad)

Currently I'm in the process of converting my regular projects from Adobe CS5(.5) to Affinity. For most parts it's manageable while at the same time I'm exploring all features, looking up solutions here in the forums, and commenting here myself. That's why I'm so active here at the moment, even though I've registered already 5 years ago. The more I'm diving deeper into the Affinity workflows, the more it starts to make sense. Many of my mindsets and muscle memories needs to be reprogrammed and that takes time and quite some learning curve. That's OK. I'm self-employed – partially as a musician as well – and have thus now plenty of time due to those worldwide "circumstances" we all know about…

Now if only Serif would finally fix all those long known [insert expletive here] bugs already…

10 minutes ago, 3joern said:

let's be honest, at this price

Definitely my argument as well.
I could only afford Adobe apps because I was deliberately skipping upgrades until the "last minute"!

1. 2001: "Adobe Design Collection" (PS7, ID2, AC5, AI10)
2. 2007: Adobe CS3, but upgraded each app individually which was cheaper than buying the monolithic suite upgrade!
3. 2011: Adobe CS5.5, same as above featuring a Black Friday discount!

Skipped CS6.
Never jumped onto CC apart from some of the freebies available on iOS. When CC came, I made a calculation how much I would have paid if the CC subscription model were here ever since I bought the Collection in 2001. That would have been pretty expensive. But I'm just not the kind of a graphic design workaholic to make a subscription affordable for how I make a living, being also just as a passionate musician and sound engineer.

Hence Affinity. The best alternative thus far.

[/offtopic] [/rant]

[3joern]

huijuijui, just used cn-convert to rotate the images by EXIF and safe. After actualization all the Images that rotated, now the rotation is right and fine. Unfortunately all image position and size had changed 

thanks good thats not a productive project with others. Just my fun family photo book, to test publisher. 

Ideally, I'd like to sit down with the programmers over coffee sometime and have them be there when I do a book/magazine that they know what graphic designers really need. 
I also tested the Studio link before when I wanted to retouch an image by retouching in an element from another image. 85% didn't work out the way I thought it would and hoped I could do it quickly. Would have taken with ID and PS evt. 4min, with Studio-Link I tried 30min around. If you select an image in the layout and says edit image, the entire layout page opens first in Photo SL. So back, double click on the image and then in the new tab on edit image (always thanks to the community here). Then you want to open another image from which you want to cut an element. Well, you can't open another image in this SL mode. When I dragged and dropped an image to open it (thats works) and wanted to cut an element, it always cut the entire layer, but not my lasso selection. Only when I opened the image in Photo separate and copied and pasted the selection into the open Publisher image did it work. 
I am trying really hard to understand Publisher and keep wanting and hoping it will get better. But it's a hard ride.

[loukash]

1 minute ago, 3joern said:

Would have taken with ID and PS evt. 4min, with Studio-Link I tried 30min around

We've spent too much time with Adobe workflows and can't get rid of that mindset. You know it's hard to learn old dogs new tricks; and don't let me even start about us cats!

3 minutes ago, 3joern said:

But it's a hard ride.

Oh, so was the switch from my beloved Freehand 9 to Ill-frustrator 10 as part of the OS X compatible "Adobe Design Collection" that I acquired in 2001.
I've never fully recovered!

[3joern]

14 minutes ago, loukash said:

We've spent too much time with Adobe workflows and can't get rid of that mindset.

I hate to say it, but with Adobe ID it's a bit more consistent and intuitive, that's why it works so far. 
But you're right, Freehand was very intuitive, unlike Illustrator. But I also have almost no problem with Affinity Designer, I think it's fabulous. That's what I'm hoping for from Publisher, but it's more like Illustrator in many ways.