Exporting into IDML please?

[StrixCZ]

Hi, I'm trying to migrate from InDesign to Publisher but one major culprit is the lack of ability to export into any format that people could open (and edit) with InDesign - this could be a deal-breaker for some clients if they ever ask me about the source data of anything and I'll be only able to provide them with the AFPUB file.

As much as I love seeing you competing with Adobe (and Publisher itself seems to be a huge contender for InDesign so far), Adobe is still the "industry-standard" (and probably will be in a foreseeable future) so being unable to export into a format that allows one to switch between Publisher and InDesign is a serious problem.

Correct me if I'm wrong but since Publisher can actually import IDML files, it even looks like the lack of functionality in terms of exporting into the very same format is willful and deliberate, rather than actual technical limitation.

Can you please add this much needed option? I understand that you want your customers to stay with your apps rather than going back to Adobe but this limitation really isn't helping your cause...

Edited November 29, 2022 by StrixCZ

[fde101]

This has been discussed before.

While IDML export would be a welcome addition, there are enough differences between the products that you cannot realistically trust that an IDML exported from Publisher will open "cleanly" in InDesign, nor the reverse.  It will normally require some work to correct any discrepancies in the document that result from those differences, so you can't trust this to reliably exchange documents with users of a different program, even if the feature is provided.

[StrixCZ]

Point taken about IDML not being an open format, even though I am not sure whether that means that Adobe actually bans other software developers from exporting into it or they just refuse to guarantee that it would import back into InDesign correctly?

Also, the format is actually highly unlikely to change as it is basically a legacy format mainly used as a fallback option, providing a backwards compatibility between Adobe CC and CS which wouldn't work anymore if they changed it.

I do understand that it wouldn't be a perfect solution for transfering documents between InDesign and Publisher but it would be still so much better to have at least some solution than not having any option (to get AFPUB document into InDesign) at all.

Importing into Publisher does seem to work pretty well - I tried opening IDML of a 40 page catalogue (including objects with transparency, effects etc.) and even though I haven't inspected it thoroughly yet it did open just fine (at a glance anyway) - so I believe that if it wouldn't be a legal problem for Affinity to include the export option, it would be actually mostly reliable (and definitely a priceless addition to the suite).

Edited November 30, 2022 by StrixCZ

[tudor]

IDML export is a must-have feature for anyone producing documents in multiple languages. Professional translation service providers use automated tools that work with IDML files. Once I had to redo a brochure in InDesign just because of this.

11 hours ago, fde101 said:

While IDML export would be a welcome addition, there are enough differences between the products that you cannot realistically trust that an IDML exported from Publisher will open "cleanly" in InDesign, nor the reverse.

The solution is to rasterize anything that isn't compatible with InDesign native objects.

[fde101]

4 minutes ago, tudor said:

Professional translation service providers use automated tools that work with IDML files. Once I had to redo a brochure in InDesign just because of this.

This is a different use case than the one presented by the OP, and one that is likely to work with greater consistency.

Again, I am not arguing against this feature: I believe it would be a good thing.  As many are hoping to use such features to eliminate the need to use InDesign themselves, my point is that after performing the export, you would need to check the document in InDesign anyway to make sure it imports cleanly, so you haven't really eliminated the need to use it, unless the recipient of the file can be trusted to do any required checking and manipulation.

This would also be helpful for moving documents from Publisher to QuarkXPress, which can similarly import (but not export) IDML files.

[tudor]

There is a manual solution to convert a file from Publisher to InDesign. I was able to recreate flyers and brochures in InDesign by simply copying and pasting graphics and text from Publisher. This sounds tedious but it actually went pretty well:

• Graphics and objects from Publisher are copied to InDesign as bitmaps with transparency. I was able to recreate graphics-heavy layouts either by pasting all graphics at once (resulting in a single bitmap), or by pasting each graphic separately (allowing for maximum flexibility when repositioning the objects).
• Once you create the text frames in InDesign, pasting text from Publisher will preserve the text styles. Huge time saver.

For a one-way conversion this is usually more than enough. Of course you need InDesign to do this. (If you're a professional graphic designer, don't fool yourself into thinking you'll ever be able to ditch Adobe software. It's just not possible.)

[tudor]

20 minutes ago, fde101 said:

This would also be helpful for moving documents from Publisher to QuarkXPress, which can similarly import (but not export) IDML files.

Markzware makes a couple of software tools that are able to export IDML files with good results. So it is possible. Quark simply wants to keep their customers locked into their file format. I guess Affinity wants that too. They should learn how an open file format could become industry standard pretty fast these days.

[fde101]

18 minutes ago, tudor said:

If you're a professional graphic designer, don't fool yourself into thinking you'll ever be able to ditch Adobe software. It's just not possible.

How many times have we heard this sort of thing before in the computer world?  Things change.

 

[PaoloT]

54 minutes ago, fde101 said:

you would need to check the document in InDesign anyway to make sure it imports cleanly

If it must be a work between peers, where the exactly same format is required, there is no alternative to using the same program. And there is still the different OS variable, that I've seen can be an issue even with the same version of InDesign.

But IDML export is incredibly useful in two cases:

- Converging contributions, with an agreement on the lowest common denominator features. Most of the layout can be exchanged with IDML. Exception can be concerted.

- Exchanging data with translation tools. It is very likely that the original Publisher file will remain intact after the two-ways exchange.

Paolo

 

[PaoloT]

6 hours ago, tudor said:

Quark simply wants to keep their customers locked into their file format.

I don't have any data analysis on which to base my idea, but I feel that QuarkXPress users are living in a walled garden. They have started using it, and continue to use it. It's a great program, reasonably priced, and there is no need to switch. They need to import files to be integrated in their editorial process, but no need to export.

Publisher looks a bit like the opposite: it is likely it will be used by freelancers to make content that will likely end up printed from InDesign.

Paolo

 

[StrixCZ]

3 hours ago, tudor said:

If you're a professional graphic designer, don't fool yourself into thinking you'll ever be able to ditch Adobe software. It's just not possible.

Actually, I'm doing just that. I mean, not entirely yet (I'm keeping PS + Lightroom until Affinity Photo comes with an option to process multiple RAW images which is absolutely crucial for me as a photographer) but I've already replaced Illustrator and InDesign with Affinity and so far it looks like they will suit my needs (with some limitations and annoyances which will hopefully be solved/removed in future versions). I do have a daily (DTP / graphic design) job now but I plan to use Affinity for my freelance work.

Edited November 30, 2022 by StrixCZ

[tudor]

1 hour ago, StrixCZ said:

I plan to use Affinity for my freelance work.

Good luck, but:

• If you’ll ever purchase vector stock artwork (I do it all the time), you’ll find out that the EPS files with transparency you’ll download from Getty, iStock etc. are not compatible with anything other than Adobe Illustrator (because they are AI files actually).
• There will come a time when your clients will ask you to provide editable “Adobe files”. Just because it’s the industry standard and they don’t want, or cannot use something else.

[PaoloT]

1 hour ago, tudor said:

There will come a time when your clients will ask you to provide editable “Adobe files”. Just because it’s the industry standard and they don’t want, or cannot use something else.

It's the typical situation where the snake is biting its own tail. You can convince the big Adobe users that the Affinity programs are good and legit ones, but if they can't be integrated into a workflow dominated by the Adobe programs, they will never be adopted. And freelancers will never be able to completely switch.

Paolo

 

[fde101]

3 minutes ago, PaoloT said:

And freelancers will never be able to completely switch.

They may be able to if they simply indicate that they cannot accommodate such requests from their clients.  It might limit the clients that they can provide work for, so which freelancers can get away with that will depend on the clients they can attract and the like - but some could do it.

[PaoloT]

8 minutes ago, fde101 said:

They may be able to if they simply indicate that they cannot accommodate such requests from their clients.

That's correct. If what you offer is the finished "product", there is no reason to even declare which tools you are using. And that's a lot of use cases (for example, photographers working on their own, small publishers, self-publishers).

Or, you might be able to offer your work in a file format that is perfectly fine for the customer or collaborators. The type of TIFF, PDF, PNG or SVG file that the Affinity programs can generate.

The real problem is for those making work for pre-press shops, or for bigger publishers, or companies adopting the industry-standard tools. I fit this latter category, and I don't know if my category is just a niche or a relevant one. In any case, at the moment we are cut out of using at least some of the Affinity programs in this scenario. In my case, it is Publisher that can't be integrated, while the other two are working perfectly fine.

Paolo

 

[StrixCZ]

2 hours ago, fde101 said:

They may be able to if they simply indicate that they cannot accommodate such requests from their clients.  It might limit the clients that they can provide work for, so which freelancers can get away with that will depend on the clients they can attract and the like - but some could do it.

This. It's mostly (bigger) companies that usually require you to provide source data on certain jobs. Since I mainly work for individuals and small businesses, I don't really expect to run into any problems, especially since I'm going to be open upfront about not using InDesign on jobs where the client asking for source data could be a possibility.

Still, the lack of any export option bothers me (even if I can live with it for now), hence my original post.

[StrixCZ]

19 hours ago, tudor said:

• If you’ll ever purchase vector stock artwork (I do it all the time), you’ll find out that the EPS files with transparency you’ll download from Getty, iStock etc. are not compatible with anything other than Adobe Illustrator (because they are AI files actually).

Illustrator has always been the least used Adobe (graphic design) app for me and I've never bought vector stock (unlike stock photos). I usually only use simple vector graphics which I either create myself or download from free stock sources (I just downloaded and tried to open 3 random ones in Affinity Designer and it opened them all). I've mainly used Illustrator to clean-up / check logos before placing them into InDesign and I'm quite sure Affinity Designer will manage this task just fine. As a hobbyist photographer I prefer to build my designs more around photos rather than vectors. So this is not really a concern for me. As for your other point, see my reply to fde101...

Edited December 1, 2022 by StrixCZ

[Atlas Games Webmaster]

+1 export to IDML. It's imperative for professional book publishing. I can't get rid of my InDesign subscription until this happens.

[yeieee]

+1 export to IDML option.