Publisher: PDF rasterized directly after Import

[Romaleon]

Hey guys,

I've got a problem with Publisher. As soon as I import one of my PDF files will be rasterized immediately. One example is attached. At first it appears as a vector drawing, after about 2 seconds it switches to rasterized. I've tried multiple workarounds, including trying to change the PDF in Acrobat, but nothing solved it. What am I doing wrong?

Cheers

Problem_PDF_Rasterization.afpub

[walt.farrell]

Welcome to the Serif Affinity forums.

I'm not sure what you mean about it being rasterized. It looks fine to me. Can you provide a screenshot that shows the problem? Please include the complete application window, and it would also help to have the Layers panel visible with the PDF layer selected.

[Romaleon]

Hello Walt

Thanks for the reply. I attached a view files showing the problem. What's weird is if I zoom in it sometimes flips back to vector drawing, so maybe something is wrong with my view settings? However this wouldn't explain the rasterization after export (also attached; the "before"-file is the one I throw into Publisher). 

Edit: The Screenshot showing my workspace is not in bad quality. It's the Pdf file being "rasterized" or whatever happens to it.

Problem_PDF_Rasterization_After.pdf Problem_PDF_Rasterization_Before.pdf Problem_PDF_Rasterization_After_2.pdf

Edited March 4, 2023 by Romaleon

[lacerto]

Obsolete.

[Romaleon]

Hi Lacerto

Thank you for your help! It has helped fix many files. Though I had to fix some of them manually by deleting their rectangle crop in layers panel and re-apply it. Sounds like a weird bug to me, probably caused by working in an outdated file with outdated elements.

 

Edited March 8, 2023 by Romaleon

[lacerto]

Obsolete.

[Ldina]

On 3/4/2023 at 3:56 PM, lacerto said:

The way to resolve this would be using "PDF (press-ready)" preset (which by default uses PDF version 1.7), and uncheck the "Embed ICC profiles" setting.

@lacerto I understood your post about PDF compatibility rules, later PDF versions, etc, but I have a few questions about why it is important to uncheck "Embed ICC profiles" in the above discussion. 

1) I'm not sure what "Embed ICC profiles" refers to (I find Affinity is often a bit unclear in their Help menus...examples and extended explanations would help). I assume this refers to the Native text, shapes, curves and other elements created within Publisher itself, but not to placed images, PDFs, etc, created in other apps? I'm assuming the placed images will have their embedded ICC profiles honored, even if "Embed ICC profiles" is checked (as long as "Convert color image spaces" is left unchecked). 

2) If "Embed ICC profiles" was left checked, why would that be a problem in the above scenario? I am assuming that the exported PDF has the same exact ICC profile as used by the commercial printer the file is being sent to. 

3) And I am assuming "Convert color image spaces", if checked, will convert all placed content to the destination ICC profile on export. Does this convert ALL placed content to the destination color space (Afphoto, afDesign, PSD, PDF, TIFF, JPG, etc)?

Thanks again.

 

 

[lacerto]

Obsolete.

[Ldina]

@lacerto Thank you, as always. If it's not fully clear to you, then those of us who are less knowledgeable about Publisher's "ins-and-outs" and PDFs are in trouble!! 😳

Affinity needs to write up a clear, in-depth and detailed document (or have a dedicated treatment in their Help files), with lots of examples, of what is going on "underneath the hood" as far as color management, PDF exports, PDF Passthrough, what causes vectors to be rasterized, how to preserve K100 text and line art, etc, are concerned. Some "best practices" and examples would be extremely helpful for typical commercial workflows and outputs. These issues aren't quite as big a deal for web or inkjet printing, but they are crucial for those of us sending jobs to Press. It's not clear to me, and from what I have seen, not totally consistent either. I've sent scores of jobs to press over the years, and have spent thousands of hours studying color management, so I'm not exactly new to this stuff. I don't mind them doing things differently from InDesign, (as long as it is clear, consistent and works properly), but we need a clear roadmap so we can deliver accurate, high-quality PDFs that print properly and don't require extensive rework. 

A good start would be to make their "labels" clearer and more informative, so we aren't guessing or hoping we understand what they mean. For example, instead of just "Embed ICC profiles", maybe they could put something like "Embed ICC profiles (for Native Publisher elements)" or whatever is correct, if that is not accurate. Or, instead of "Convert Image Color Spaces", "Convert Image Color Spaces (placed raster images)". These may not be accurate statements or the best possible wording, but you get the idea. Or, how about little warnings that a certain export feature could cause a problem (like unwanted rasterization, or conversion of K100 to 4/C black). Or a little Help menu next to a checkbox item for additional detail? 

You're right, having a tool like Acrobat Pro or another PDF production App that will analyze, fix and/or convert PDFs after exporting from Publisher, is crucial for jobs going to Press. 

I'm pretty new to Affinity and have only been hanging around on these forums for a few months, so I don't know how to get their attention. If they can make it easier and more transparent, it will be good for us and them alike. There are so many things I like about the v2 suite, so I hope they take note and address these issues and inconsistencies. It will result in more sales and greater acceptance. How can we reach them so they address this? 

Thanks for listening. 

 

[lacerto]

Obsolete.

[lacerto]

Obsolete.

[lacerto]

Obsolete.

[Ldina]

Transparency, clarity and specific details are what are needed, IMO. InDesign provides a lot of extra descriptive information when you export to Press PDF, PDF/X, etc, and select, for example, "Convert to Profile - Preserve Color Numbers", which gives the user a lot of helpful details about what will and will not happen when making that selection, what will be converted, what will not be converted, etc. That's not a particularly hard thing to do, and it will save users from a lot of guesswork, frustration and error. It's presently obscure and confusing with Publisher. If Serif spent some time addressing this, they'd make their life and ours easier. Why is Amazon so successful?...they make the buying process easy, fluid, transparent, simple and enjoyable (whether you love or hate them). There's a lesson to be learned here.

I'll bet that many (perhaps the majority of) service providers would not be able to recommend appropriate Job Options settings for PDF exports from Publisher. It's too inconsistent and complex right now. They can tell us how the final PDF should be configured, but not how to generate that PDF file from Publisher. That's routine for InDesign.  I'd prefer not to spend hours and hours experimenting and trying to figure this out by trial and error, though I am more tenacious than many people. Others will throw up their hands and leave (and from some of the posts I have read, many have done just that, which is unfortunate and avoidable). I like the product and want to use it professionally, and I'd like it to attract other professionals as well. But they have to make it clear, easy and transparent. 

Luckily, I do have Acrobat Pro and can make final changes to a PDF file exported from Publisher so it conforms with the print shop's requirement, but the whole process is way to difficult at present. I hope Serif is listening. 

 

[thomaso]

3 hours ago, N.P.M. said:

Just wanted to point out that some info would be available when one opens the file in a texteditor.

These joboptions were created for ID (or another Adobe app), which has different (more specific) export options than Affinity. Thus some problems / questions would resist even when reading the file as text.

3 hours ago, N.P.M. said:

But I think Serif cannot supply such info as there would be to much variables to consider.

Hm? Who else would know if not Serif? They would not create the joboptions files but simply the interface to export a specific export setting as file + to import such a file for export on a different computer. Currently we can export / import all export presets only but not a specific one.

Nevertheless, in Affinity a correct export setting may also depend on the document colour setting + the Affinity app preference setting. In my experience this influence is larger (more delicate) in Affinity than in ID. … Compare the tricky handling of the "Convert" / "Assign" button in a document's colour setting, or the possible issues with placed container formats (PDF, afpub, afdesign, afphoto).

[Ldina]

@N.P.M. Thanks for the clarification. I agree...every print shop has its own, specific requirements that we need to meet. It's not always transparent or easy to generate a PDF from Publisher that conforms to those requirements. That's my main point. Publisher has some awesome tools and I like using the program (especially for my own projects that are not headed to Press). They still have some basic "blocking and tackling" to address, in my opinion. 

9 hours ago, thomaso said:

Nevertheless, in Affinity a correct export setting may also depend on the document colour setting + the Affinity app preference setting. In my experience this influence is larger (more delicate) in Affinity than in ID. … Compare the tricky handling of the "Convert" / "Assign" button in a document's colour setting, or the possible issues with placed container formats (PDF, afpub, afdesign, afphoto).

@thomaso Thank you. Yes, things are overly complex and confusing, and there are a myriad of settings can trip you up. With all this complexity, it becomes ever more important for Serif to provide in-depth clarity, more explanations and examples, best practices, etc. I'd be in favor of them reducing complexity and tightening up some of their "rules" related to color management (conversions and assignments), K100 preservation, vector rasterization, etc.

To me, these are "basics", especially for any page layout job headed to Press. Hopefully, they will see that it is in their best interest to do so.

[Seneca]

5 hours ago, N.P.M. said:

Assigning/converting colors is also a strange option I never took a look at and could be better documented.

I hope I'm not misunderstanding your post but I wouldn't consider that to be strange in any way.

Precisely the same options exist in Adobe Products (inDesign for example) and nobody considers them strange there.

[thomaso]

7 hours ago, Seneca said:

Precisely the same options exist in Adobe Products (inDesign for example) and nobody considers them strange there.

Where do you see this same?

To me even the old ID CS6 differs quite obviously from APub, e.g. regarding …
… the amount of available options,
… accordingly the interface, handling and effects on documents,
… and finally the effect & relevance of these document properties for an export of a document (different to the export options).

For instance:

• Two separate menu entries & option windows for "Assign" and "Convert":

• Different & more options for "Assign":

• Different & more options for "Convert":

• App preferences (if wanted auto-set across the suite of various apps):

… including some more options for Profile handling:

 

In fact, in ID I did not consider them to be strange, mainly because I did not experience them as such (e.g. because of the explaining text about details for every possible option). Whereas when starting with Affinity the confusion gets created by the automatic comparison, inevitable because of its lack of documentation. So Affinity does not tell whether an option would be a known one & work as expected (as learned) or partly only or entirely different and, if different, different in what way and with what consequences to what types of elements of a document.

Add-On: since the app preferences for colour management could get exported & imported it was quite easy to transfer them between computers or maybe companies. Means once you got a preset created by a trustful person (collegue, service, company) you could simply import + select it as the active preset.

[Seneca]

1 hour ago, thomaso said:

Where do you see this same?

Hello @thomaso,

I wasn't trying to be controversial here but my point was that these same "terms" of "Convert" and "Assign" exist exist also in Adobe.

And that it's important to understand the difference between the two.

 

[thomaso]

4 hours ago, Seneca said:

same "terms" of "Convert" and "Assign"

Well, "terms" sounds different than "options" … which were misleading before.

4 hours ago, N.P.M. said:

But it could more simplified with either explanatory helpfiles/ tutorials or for those that are not into technical stuff, to make it easier by simply apply a template with settings that takes care of this technical stuff for you.

If I understand your idea of templates correctly, this might confuse even more especially if such templates are meant to get rid of any need to care for colour management from layout to export.

In Affinity the problem is less a matter of a preset or template to start with: The lack of the export option to "preserve colour values" may require in Affinity to change the document colour profile before export to maintain 100 K for text or other specific values (e.g. client's corporate colour definitions) in case the printer requests a specific profile which differs from the layout profile or space. In this situation "assign" vs "convert" gets relevant (and is additionally confusing by the default pressed "convert" button).

With other words: different to ID the document space & profile (and the app prefs, too) can have more influence on the required export settings. This triple of app prefs + document space/profile + export setting might not get solved easily with ready-made templates – and may confuse if saved with the Affinity document.

Last but not least, there is the Affinity problem with placed container formats (PDF, Affinity files) as a fourth colour setting in addition to the triple just mentioned – whereas a template could not consider placed files.

[Ldina]

@thomaso I agree 100%. 👍