Publisher V1 Flatten Transparency for PDF

[Chris26]

I need to flatten transparency which I have in my Publisher doc for PDF.  Unlike Adobe PDF I see no option to tick a box that says you can flatten transparency before submitting to press.  Also I can not find any flattening technique within publisher.  All I have is a gradient or two over images and a picture frame box with a gradient white white fill covering half an image.

Thank you

[Old Bruce]

37 minutes ago, Chris26 said:

I can not find any flattening technique within publisher.

Have you tried using Layer > Rasterize ... or right clicking in the Layers panel and choosing Rasterize and Trim.

[thomaso]

For a flattened PDF export you don't need to flatten your layout document, instead it is sufficient to use the according export options. Therefore you can either/or

– choose the export preset "PDF (Flatten)"
– choose in "More" > "Compatibility" the menu entry "PDF/X-1a 2003" as export PDF format
– select in "More" the menu entry "Rasterise: Everything"

[Chris26]

13 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Have you tried using Layer > Rasterize ... or right clicking in the Layers panel and choosing Rasterize and Trim.

Hallo Old Bruce, thank you for replying, I have always been confused about this particular option since it has an ellipsis after it, which in any other software means you expect a dialogue box, regardless of whether something needs rasterising or not.  On top of which I assume that anything that comes into publisher via my photoshop is pixel anyway and is therefore not vector.   I never know what the hell this option means anyway.  Hope you understand my confusion with this particular "thing".  Basically then, if I place any box that has something in it that was created within publisher itself whether overlay or gradient, then that needs rasterising into pixels? 

10 hours ago, thomaso said:

For a flattened PDF export you don't need to flatten your layout document, instead it is sufficient to use the according export options. Therefore you can either/or

– choose the export preset "PDF (Flatten)"
– choose in "More" > "Compatibility" the menu entry "PDF/X-1a 2003" as export PDF format
– select in "More" the menu entry "Rasterise: Everything"

Thankyou Thomaso for this.

[walt.farrell]

2 hours ago, Chris26 said:

Basically then, if I place any box that has something in it that was created within publisher itself whether overlay or gradient, then that needs rasterising into pixels? 

Not always; only if it involves transparency, and your printer requires that you not have transparency. An empty box, or an opaque box, should not be a problem.

 

2 hours ago, Chris26 said:

I have always been confused about this particular option since it has an ellipsis after it, which in any other software means you expect a dialogue box, regardless of whether something needs rasterising or not.

In Affinity applications, the ... sometimes indicates that an additional dialog may be necessary, depending on additional factors. If those factors apply to a specific case, there will be an additional dialog, otherwise not. There have been requests for the application to remove the ... when the additional factors don't apply.

[Chris26]

2 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

Not always; only if it involves transparency, and your printer requires that you not have transparency. An empty box, or an opaque box, should not be a problem.

 

In Affinity applications, the ... sometimes indicates that an additional dialog may be necessary, depending on additional factors. If those factors apply to a specific case, there will be an additional dialog, otherwise not. There have been requests for the application to remove the ... when the additional factors don't apply.

Thanks Walt, ever friendly as usual.

[thomaso]

2 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

In Affinity applications, the ... sometimes indicates that an additional dialog may be necessary, depending on additional factors. If those factors apply to a specific case, there will be an additional dialog, otherwise not. There have been requests for the application to remove the ... when the additional factors don't apply.

Can you give an example where the "Rasterise…" command triggers a dialog or options window before getting executed?

Like @Chris26 I was confused for quite a while by these ellipses but their "sudden" result. It can give the feeling you can't fully trust the menu entries and you can cause an unwanted (or possibly undoable) action without really noticing it, because no dialog appeared and thus the task possible was not executed (without keeping an eye in the Layers panel while choosing the menu entry somewhere else on your screen).

Anyway, it may be less risky if there are no "…", then you might get surprised just by an additional dialog offer but not by a suddenly executed task possibly without noticing it.

It reminds me to this post and below within an earlier thread about menu entries:

[walt.farrell]

49 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Can you give an example where the "Rasterise…" command triggers a dialog or options window before getting executed?

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, thomaso said:

It can give the feeling you can't fully trust the menu entries and you can cause an unwanted (or possibly undoable) action without really noticing it, because no dialog appeared and thus the task possible was not executed (without keeping an eye in the Layers panel while choosing the menu entry somewhere else on your screen).

If you're unsure you can also check History.

[thomaso]

1 minute ago, walt.farrell said:

If you're unsure you can also check History.

I rather mean situations where I am not aware of the possibility something might have changed but am rather convinced, my used menu command didn't do anything.

Similar to the situation when I choose a certain command + a layer gets auto-rasterized for the execution (my assist settings). If I undo such a command (cmd-Z) then the layer will remain rasterized – unless I notice this extra history entry.

[walt.farrell]

3 minutes ago, thomaso said:

but am rather convinced, my used menu command didn't do anything.

That's a perfect time to look at History, in my opinion.

4 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Similar to the situation when I choose a certain command + a layer gets auto-rasterized for the execution (my assist settings). If I undo such a command (cmd-Z) then the layer will remain rasterized – unless I notice this extra history entry.

https://affinity.help/photo2/en-US.lproj/pages/Workspace/preferences.html

Quote

Assistant options

When you perform certain operations—for example, pixel painting (or erasing) on vector layers, or applying adjustments to selections—the Assistant will take action according to your preferences and display an alert message to make you aware.

Use these options to control overall Assistant behavior:

• Enable assistant—when checked, the Assistant will perform your chosen action for any operation it can help with. When unchecked, the Assistant does not perform any actions.
• One-step undo/redo of complex assistant actions—when checked, any action that has been recorded as multiple consecutive history states is treated like one state by the Undo and Redo commands. When unchecked, the commands need to be selected multiple times to undo/redo multi-state assistant actions.

Though I think that highlighted one has a different name than shown in the Help:

 

[thomaso]

16 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

That's a perfect time to look at History, in my opinion.

Sounds like a joke. In situations where you are convinced that nothing happened, you will not be suspicious and look in the history. Checking the history presupposes mistrust, the opposite feeling.

19 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

multiple consecutive history states is treated like one state by the Undo and Redo commands

Ah, this is good to know about V2, thank you! (unfortunately I still stick to V1 without this one-step option)

[walt.farrell]

24 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Sounds like a joke. In situations where you are convinced that nothing happened, you will not be suspicious and look in the history. Checking the history presupposes mistrust, the opposite feeling.

We must think differently.

To be convinced that nothing happened, I must be thinking of the possibility that something could have happened. And I can only be convinced it didn't if I investigate.

[thomaso]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

We must think differently.

To be convinced that nothing happened, I must be thinking

Maybe. Or "convinced" is ambiguous: It can be a feeling (without thinking, similar to "believe", "blind trust") or can be a result of conscious, analytical thoughts.

While it's kind of paradox: If I don't notice a change the UI made me think there was no change (> convinced, believe - because the '…'-dialog did not occur). But later I can notice the change that I just haven't noticed before (rasterize). Then I can distrust the UI because I experienced to trust it (initially, erroneously). If I am lucky this "trust the UI" happens only once before "trust the distrust" gets common – but I don't know before when my turn will come. 🙄

Whereas the normal procedure and ideally even my goal should always be to trust the UI. A dilemma follows a paradox. 😳