Convert to Artboard Issue (Bug?)

[Clayton King]

UPDATE: Using Windows Designer 1.9 on a capable laptop.

 

I have a designer document whose page size is 8.5 x 11. The document has two groups of objects, each measuring 3.5 x 5". 

I want to convert each of these objects to its own artboard.

So I choose the first group and with the Artboard tool, choose Selection and Insert Artboard in the context menu. Artboard1 is created with the group as expected.

When I repeat this procedure with the second group, Artboard2 is double the width of the object (i.e., the size it would be with both objects) and covers both objects, although the group from Artboard1 in the layers palette is not part of this new artboard.

I don't think this is expected behavior.

Anyone else?

[walt.farrell]

Not for me (at least in the 1.10 beta).

OS?

Sample .afdesign document?

[Dan C]

Hi @Clayton King,

Sorry to hear you're having trouble! Unfortunately I too have been unable to replicate this issue, and it may be document specific to the group's you're selecting.

Could you please provide a copy of the .afdesign file in question, so we can investigate this further for you? 

[Clayton King]

Here's the file. I'll be curious to see what you encounter.

 

Thanks!

 

Clayton

preschool logo.afdesign

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, Clayton King said:

I'll be curious to see what you encounter.

It's because of the Black & White Adjustment layer, which is hidden in the bottom group but not hidden in the top group.

1. If you hide it in the top group, that group works fine when creating the Artboard.
2. Conversely, if you unhide it in the bottom group, that group also makes an Artboard that is twice as big.

[walt.farrell]

It would be interesting to know how you created the objects in the Groups, and how you created the Black & White Adjustment layers.

But I can say that if you create a stand-alone Black & White Adjustment layer (that is, one that is not nested within an object such as a pixel layer), then the Adjustment layer is the size of the canvas.

So, if you have a canvas in Designer (as you do), and you create an object, then create an Adjustment on top of the object (not nested to it), and then Group the object and the Adjustment, you have:

1. The object of whatever size it has; and
2. The Adjustment layer that is the size of the canvas.

If you now Group them, You get something like this:

That is misleading, because the bounding box would lead you to think that the Group is the size of the image. But in reality, the Group is as big as the Adjustment layer, which is the complete canvas. And if you now use the Artboard Tool to insert an Artboard the size of that selection you get an Artboard as big as the canvas, rather than one as big as the image:

On the other hand, if I had nested the Adjustment layer to the Image layer, the Artboard would have been the expected size.

 

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

That is misleading, because the bounding box would lead you to think that the Group is the size of the image.

More than misleading, it possibly even could be considered a bug that the adjustment layer is not automatically made the size of its parent.

I can't think of any scenario where it would be useful if it was not the same size. Can you?

[walt.farrell]

11 minutes ago, R C-R said:

More than misleading, it possibly even could be considered a bug that the adjustment layer is not automatically made the size of its parent.

In my example above, when the adjustment layer was created it had no parent. I had an image layer, and above it, unrelated, an adjustment.

I then created a Group from the adjustment layer and the image layer. And in that scenario the adjustment layer remains the size of the canvas, and the bounding box for the Group is misleading (or, possibly, simply wrong). Also, note the structure shown in the Layers panel:

 

Contrast with this scenario:

1. Create the image layer.
2. Group it.
3. With the Group selected, create the Adjustment layer

In that scenario, you get a Layers panel that looks like this:

And if you convert that Group to an Artboard it is the proper size, as the Adjustment was in fact the size of the Group.

 

[R C-R]

12 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

In my example above, when the adjustment layer was created it had no parent.

I realize that. What I am suggesting is adjustment layers should automatically resize to the size of the parent layer whenever they become a child of a parent layer. Likewise, if it is removed from a parent layer, it should automatically resize to the size of the canvas or artboard (which in effect is the parent layer of the document, so the logic is the same).

[walt.farrell]

Yes, thanks, @R C-R. I agre that's a better way of working.