Default location for Save As (and Export)

[Sharon Villines]

I still don't understand if the save to option is a feature of the Apple IO why the only program I have problems with is Affinity Photo. I save frequently to keep prior work. Having to check every time to be sure where the file will be saved to is irritating and frustrating and invites me to look for alternatives to Affinity.

Having the default change every time I open and save a file means I have recent copies of a file all over my laptop and have to remember to check to be sure I'm opening the most recent copy of the file. If I open a file from from a folder, I expect it to save back to exactly that folder unless I use "Save As" and change the location.

I have installed DefaultFolderX and it seems to work but I'm irritated to have to install an add on just to make Affinity safe to use.

[erkerkerk]

@Sharon Villines Agreed, this was one of a few major longstanding UX oversights that kept me from purchasing Affinity.

[mzisxx]

Hello
Are there any plans to add this feature? It would be really helpful.

[p10n]

100% Agree.

If I would start today, I would rather invest in Corel. But I am locked in with all my files in Affinity format...

[Digidoggy2]

 

We have been using all three Affinity apps on 20 mac workstations now for several years. Also we are teaching our students how to work with Affinity Photo. We are extremely frustrated with all Affinity apps choosing the last destination that was used for exports instead of the location of the original file. And now we feel even more frustrated as we found out that this topic is discussed since ages without any reaction! What can we do....go back to Adobe??????

 

[gw_westdale]

This keeps driving me crazy - I work on several things in the same day and each time I do a test export or save as new version I have to go through the same rigmarole.  There may be some customers who have multiple sources and all their exports go to a single folder but I cannot imagine working that way.  At the very least could we have this as an application level option.

 

[Unfocused711]

For me (on Windows 10), Affinity Publisher always tries to export to the last directory referenced. For example, if I add a photo to my document from my Photos directory, then it will default to export my pdf file to that Photos directory.  I have just replaced a photo from three different directories and, in each case, my subsequent export defaulted to each of those directories.  This is incredibly frustrating and could cause a costly error if I then sent the wrong pdf to be printed.  Surely there should be a default option that will always send my export to a specific directory, or to the same directory as the afpub file, or to the same directory that it was last saved to. Or something logical!  As it is, the behaviour is utterly ridiculous.  I do hope you can tell me that such an option exists somewhere and that I haven't spotted it or, at the very least, that something is in the pipeline to rectify this issue.

[gw_westdale]

Has anyone noticed that this thread is  EIGHT YEARS OLD  - is it just in the 'too hard' pile ? I cannot believe it would be a challenge to code.

[AllSaints]

Still waiting. 

[gw_westdale]

2 hours ago, AllSaints said:

Still waiting. 

I have , for once, raised a new topic to call attention. Bad practice, but I feel it is justfied in this case.

[p10n]

On 6/19/2024 at 2:57 PM, gw_westdale said:

Has anyone noticed that this thread is  EIGHT YEARS OLD  - is it just in the 'too hard' pile ? I cannot believe it would be a challenge to code.

I am desparate with the Affinity guys here.

What do they need to wake up? Bad reviews in the app store? A shitstorm on social media?

(Still using the workaround DefaultFolderX, otherwise I would get mad with this. I would seriously use Corel nowadays, if I did not have a lot of Affinity files around.)

[AliMu]

On 6/19/2024 at 3:57 PM, gw_westdale said:

Has anyone noticed that this thread is  EIGHT YEARS OLD  - is it just in the 'too hard' pile ? I cannot believe it would be a challenge to code.

It seems based on this rate, my requests will take a decade or so

And to answer your question, No, it's not hard to change the default exporting path, 2-3 lines of code should be enough

[lepr]

2 hours ago, AliMu said:

It seems based on this rate, my requests will take a decade or so

Based on the current rate, it will never happen 😀

[AliMu]

3 minutes ago, lepr said:

Based on the current rate, it will never happen 😀

Thanks, this helps a lot 😂

[Timothy Blinks]

One things for sure, I'm not going to buy the next major version if Affinity can't fix this tiny and incredibly annoying, time-wasting lack of a basic functionality.

I talked myself into the last upgrade because they finally added footnotes, which I reckoned was worth... something. Maybe not what I paid for it, but something.

Hey, screw votes, maybe if we get as many people as possible vowing not to give Affinity anymore $, there will be a change.

[Pšenda]

On 6/19/2024 at 2:51 PM, Unfocused711 said:

that will always send my export to a specific directory

I recommend using the File Explorer features (namely, pinning a folder to Quick Access so that the selection of a specific folder/folders is always quickly available), whose dialog is used for the standard Open, SaveAs and Export commands.

[Ezbaze]

Please (Literally begging for this), give us a choice 🙏

[PaulEC]

Although I don't always want to save files to the same folder that I opened them from, it would be nice to have the choice of default location. One of my big complaints about Affinity software in general is the way that the developers force their preferences on the user, rather than letting them choose defaults etc for themselves.

[frindley]

And if they are going to force a default on users, it should be the default that's standard for the platform/operating system.

Every other Mac app I use defaults to the location of the current working file when I choose "Save As". I can then choose to save my new version in that folder (which I typically want and which is to be expected when versioning) OR I can choose a new location (which I occasionally want if, say, I'm using an old file to start a new project, and when I do want that it's a very deliberate choice, so I'm going to be selecting a new location anyway).

What I never want is to save the new version of my file in a completely unrelated, random folder simply because that was the last location I saved some other Affinity work file and so it has popped up as "default". 

There's a reason the standard Mac behaviour is standard in this scenario: it's logical, saves unnecessary work, and is unlikely to lead to "misplaced" files. 

(The number of times I've had to search for and move misplaced versions of Affinity files is just nuts. I've never had to go searching for misplaced versions of files made in any other software. And that says it all, I think.)

I cannot for the life of me fathom why the Affinity developers chose to depart from standard Mac saving behaviour in this instance, nor why they are so stubbornly clinging to it when there are pages and pages (since 2016!) of people pleading with them to change it. 

[lepr]

12 minutes ago, frindley said:

why they are so stubbornly clinging to it when there are pages and pages (since 2016!) of people pleading with them to change it. 

That's the Affinity Arrogance. Sadly, there's been no change from the user's point of view since Canva took over.

[Pšenda]

28 minutes ago, frindley said:

nor why they are so stubbornly clinging to it when there are pages and pages (since 2016!) of people pleading with them to change it. 

In general (for any request made here on the forum), it is necessary to take into account the fact that there are about 3 million users (not just the few who discuss here on the forum), and that Serif also uses other information sources when designing applications, which of course are not visible here on the forum, and moreover, they can be completely different. Another completely indisputable fact is that if you have limited resources of development capacities, even the best and most requested request may not be implemented, because there simply is not enough free capacity for it. Alternatively, the capacities would have to be taken away from something even more important, which Serif has been working on for a long time, which would in turn harm other users.

[frindley]

All very reasonable @Pšenda. And I think if users here were requesting a tool or a feature/function that was elaborate or unusual or new or seriously resource intensive to develop, I would take the same attitude as you. (In fact I do, when it comes to other things that are suggested in these forums.)

But what we're talking about is implementing basic saving behaviour that is standard across the Mac eco-system. (I can't speak for Windows, since it's been some years since I've worked in that OS, but my recollection is that it was standard there too.) 

And if it's standard behaviour relating to a fundamental function that virtually every app needs (Save As), then surely this is basic code that can be found in the developer toolkit? In other words, I wouldn't expect it to be an unreasonably labour- or time-intensive change to implement. And that within the past eight years, surely something could have been done about it.  

In any case, aside from the long-standing demand (at least amongst the forum community and very likely amongst users who don't post here), it's just good UI/UX practice to implement/follow the standard behaviours of your operating system unless there's a really good reason for doing it differently. And the more users you have (and the more users you hope to attract) the more reason to adopt standard UI/UX practices, to smooth out learning curves for newcomers and reduce friction for everyone. So yes, despite the good points you make, I remain mystified as to why this particular point of friction has been allowed to remain.

[gw_westdale]

Eight years and five months and counting

[Meliora spero]

My experience tells me that the companies that get it right with the type of interface I (and others) are asking for often have many other aspects of the customers' workflows integrated into the interface. This reflects a genuine, close collaboration with customers and a deep understanding and acknowledgment that they rely on their customers, and their customers, in turn, rely on their own customers.

It doesn’t have to be some kind of Japanese-level total respect, just a recognition that your customers don’t save files following patterns typical of someone who has bought a computer for household use and saves everything in banal places.

[Ian Brockbank]

@Serif how can we vote for features? This is a long-term annoyance to me as well, and if there is a place where enhancements could get voted on it would immediately get my +1.

Thanks