Overlapping Artboards - An Example of why Affinity's Use Case Doesn't Work

[meridian360]

The Use Case of keeping ALL of your graphic elements on ONE art board at a time fails when working on larger projects that need to be broken up into smaller pieces later on. 

Example: MAPS. 

Here's a simple National Forest off road map I've been playing with. The USFS lets you download the PDF and Affinity Designer opens the file just fine. It's a 24"x28" file. So I pulled the pieces apart and sorted all the elements into layers. (How AD still does that poorly compared to Illustrator is for another day.)

But when I went to print just the main portion of the map into three letter sized (8.5x11") sheets the Affinity Artboard rule prevented me from easily printing just the three sub-sections of the map. 

In Illustrator, you just add three smaller artboards within the larger workspace, and then print just those three, and tada, you get whatever was shown within those areas. 

In Affinity, I placed the three new artboards to cover the sub-sections, but they remained BLANK. Because the graphical content is still on Artboard 1!! There is no visual overlap, "You shall not pass!" 

And to make it so those three smaller artboards have all that content? Yeah, forget it. Not worth the effort. I exported the new AD file as a new PDF, opened it in AI.... made the new AI artboards, and just printed those three AI artboards. Done. 

So there's one example of why Affinity's clinging to "all content MUST be on ONE art board and ONLY one artboard" is just not ready for prime time. At least for a wide range of graphical uses where a larger project is broken up into smaller pieces. 

I just want to be able to print/export portions of a larger workspace EASILY. The sandboxing of objects into separate artboards isn't doing it. 

Thanks, .curt

[prophet]

A valid complaint I think.

Best workaround I can come up with…use vector shapes rather than artboards. With the shape selected, one can export with the "Selection Area" option.

This doesn't help with direct printing, but I can export out to PDF and then print from there.

[meridian360]

1 minute ago, prophet said:

A valid complaint I think.

Best workaround I can come up with…use vector shapes rather than artboards. With the shape selected, one can export with the "Selection Area" option.

This doesn't help with direct printing, but I can export out to PDF and then print from there.

I haven't tried that yet, but at least there's something for small projects. But one of my clients had a relay race with 36 legs. So each leg had its own letter sized map, that was built from the overall route. Doing that process each time seems cumbersome? Especially if you're just printing test proofs to see if an overall change works on all pages. Sigh. Thanks for the thought though. I'll try that process for small stuff. 

I wonder if they could "just" add 'print boards' that are like art boards but are only for printing and exporting. Hm. Leave the existing behavior (and code base) for those who (ack) who like it. But add the ability to use portions in other ways. 

[fde101]

18 hours ago, meridian360 said:

I wonder if they could "just" add 'print boards' that are like art boards but are only for printing and exporting.

They already have.  Slices, in the Export persona.  Create your map on one big artboard, and use slices to define the individual areas to export.

[meridian360]

3 hours ago, fde101 said:

They already have.  Slices, in the Export persona.  Create your map on one big artboard, and use slices to define the individual areas to export.

Slices don't function the same procedurally. There's no way to define margins or bleeds on those pages. So again, the sandboxing of content into one artboard at a time is a conceptual roadblock to many workflows, and to long established software UI/UX standards. 

Moreover, when in the normal working "persona", you can't even see where your export boxes are, so the personas aren't transparent back and forth. That's a huge omission. 

Maybe there's patent issues, who knows. But if it's just "Affinity's Way"?...there's work to be done. 

[Old Bruce]

5 minutes ago, meridian360 said:

Slices don't function the same procedurally. There's no way to define margins or bleeds on those pages. ...

Regarding margins, is there any way to export them? I don't see a way, I also have to admit that I have never considered them to be necessary for export.

Regarding bleeds, if I choose an export format that can include Bleeds (and printer's marks) then I can include them. This is with the Export persona and both Layers promoted to slices and manually drawn slices.

[meridian360]

Just now, Old Bruce said:

Regarding margins, is there any way to export them? I don't see a way, I also have to admit that I have never considered them to be necessary for export.

Regarding bleeds, if I choose an export format that can include Bleeds (and printer's marks) then I can include them. This is with the Export persona and both Layers promoted to slices and manually drawn slices.

It's just the idea that for decades, graphic software let you set up pages "anywhere" and let you put your graphic elements where you want, and not be 'locked' into one art board at a time. When you create pages/art boards in all the other apps pre-dating aD, margins/bleeds/etc could be set if you needed them. So please don't be distracted by that addition to the 'argument'. 

The/my overriding message/plea is let us/me have all our content sprawl out everywhere in a large workspace. Then, if need be, let us/me come back with pages/art boards and print and/or export all that content, with layers intact. So, basically as Illustrator does it, yes. For moving content around, it's a faster and superior approach. (This doesn't even mention that sandboxing hides content that falls off your current art board, which is itself asking for problems, in my opinion.) 

Really, I'm just pushing, but pushing to make Designer better. Because I really REALLY want to drop Adobe. 

[fde101]

Margins are a design feature, not an export feature.  If you are chopping up one large image into a bunch of smaller ones, then margins are irrelevant as they are going to look the same regardless.

The one time they might come into play would be for scaling and/or positioning the content onto a page before printing, and since you can't currently print slices directly, this may be a requirement if the ability to print slices (as opposed to artboards) were added to the program, which is probably a reasonable enhancement to ask for.

 

17 minutes ago, meridian360 said:

basically as Illustrator does it, yes

Illustrator isn't really a good program to serve as a role model.  Trying to make one program work like another one due to familiarity is not likely to win favors with the developers unless a functional argument can be made in its favor.

 

19 minutes ago, meridian360 said:

with layers intact

I can see perhaps adding the ability to export native Affinity files from slices in order to preserve the layers, but again that seems like something that can be done as an enhancement to the the existing slices in the export persona - I don't understand what it is that you are looking to do that would require changing the entire structure of the way that artboards work to do it.

What I am reading into this so far is a request for two enhancements to the slices in the export persona: the ability to print based on them, and the ability to export individual slices as native Affinity files with their layers intact.

[meridian360]

1 minute ago, fde101 said:

Illustrator isn't really a good program to serve as a role model.  Trying to make one program work like another one due to familiarity is not likely to win favors with the developers unless a functional argument can be made in its favor.

 

I can see perhaps adding the ability to export native Affinity files from slices in order to preserve the layers, but again that seems like something that can be done as an enhancement to the the existing slices in the export persona - I don't understand what it is that you are looking to do that would require changing the entire structure of the way that artboards work to do it.

What I am reading into this so far is a request for two enhancements to the slices in the export persona: the ability to print based on them, and the ability to export individual slices as native Affinity files with their layers intact.

Except Illustrator is their direct competitor and like it or not, the standard in the industry. (I'll say it again, I'm trying to get away from their subscription model!!) AI works the way it does based on how the 'real world' works. You draw on the table and your line doesn't stop at the edge of your paper...it keeps going onto the table. It's a real world analogy, that Affinity has deemed to ignore. And the sandboxing of art boards is a truncation of a feature. You lose immediate selection of objects if they are off the art board! Again, how that can that be better? Especially when the object selection methods in aD are inconsistent. (Yes, I can document that, too.)

If you have two "slices" or artboards, that require different treatment (different content), just slicing it doesn't cut it. Pun intended. Because the content is all in one bucket. It's Art Board First *always*. I can't have a large base map, and then ALSO have unique content for each overlapping page show up. There's no way to have that combined content in Designer. I'd have to replicate that basemap 36 times, in the case mentioned above. Whereas in Illustrator, I have a base map in layer, and then just create unique layers for individual pages that get turned on and off, as needed, etc. And the base map content gets automatically included with each overlapping page/art board. And you can SEE where pages are, and the pages have their own margins, bleed, guide setups IF they need it. Each AI page isn't just a cookie cutter, after the fact. 

There are all sorts of reasons why you would want to have content overlap, my maps example is just one. Another is when I simply want to print a big poster out of letter sized sheets. I know you "just" print with an overlap. But I like more control of the overlaps. So I'd place the image in a large workspace. Then create a grid of overlapping pages that met my needs. Then printed those pages. Done. Can't do that in aD because the image would be in only one board/page. Now, the slices could do that, which is good. But you still can't see the slices back in Vector Persona. IMO, that needs added. 

In summary, any project that has two 'levels' of content: overall and page-based content breaks the art board sandboxed approach. And every time, Adobe get's another check. It doesn't have to be that way. I don't want it to be that way. 

[HCl]

.

[loukash]

On 11/15/2024 at 5:28 PM, meridian360 said:

I just want to be able to print/export portions of a larger workspace EASILY.

Layer hierarchy matters:

Voilà.

[meridian360]

39 minutes ago, Return said:

Not the same at all. 

Read my whole thread. You just put a bunch of objects on one workspace up there and cut them up. That's half the equation. 

Now, make the yellow on one larger workspace. and then add the other colors on discrete pages and WORK on them in the Vector Persona. Keep the yellow showing up in all other other colors' workspaces as your work. You can't. Content is either in one sandbox or the other. There is no overlap between artboards/layers-within-artboards.

There's no sharing of content between art boards. 

In my screenshot, it doesn't matter where the objects are, they all just float on the workspace. In aD, as soon you separate things the same way, you start cutting objects off at the art board edges! They aren't shared in the Vector Persona. They don't flow up and down the Layer panel stack, at all. 

It's not JUST about printing and exporting, but how objects interact while being worked on. 

 

[meridian360]

39 minutes ago, loukash said:

Layer hierarchy matters:

Voilà.

NOT voila. Do it for each art board. 

And have the objects interact in Vector Persona BEFORE you export/print. The export/print is the end goal, but really it's the layer panel and how the art boards are sandboxed in the first place that is the issue. 

Sure one can Clip out a portion of a project. But look at my past post with the screenshots. Can you have the contents of one art board interact and be combined with the contents of another art board? Nope. 

My example: Artboard3....where did the green box go? Gone, because the art boards don't interact. Quarantined from each other. So one can't simple make 'dummy' art boards and export those as 'print boards'. And using slices >might< work, but you can't see them in the Vector Persona so you don't know where your export bounds are while you're working. 

 

 

[fde101]

33 minutes ago, meridian360 said:

Do it for each art board. 

Why do you need artboards?  Why do these need to be in separate "workspaces"?

Never mind, I just noticed why you are thinking that way.

 

Slices in the export persona work independently of artboards, and artboards can be layered on top of each other.

One option is to create one big artboard for the common map and put the common content on it.  Create smaller artboards where you need unique content.

Slices can capture the images across all artboards.

The catch is that you need to hide the smaller artboards whose content you want to exclude from the individual slices when exporting them, so that could get old fast depending on how many of these you need to wrangle.

 

Again, this is likely solved by an adjustment in the slices feature: the ability to select which artboards to include content from when exporting the slice.

[meridian360]

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

Why do you need artboards?  Why do these need to be in separate "workspaces"?

Never mind, I just noticed why you are thinking that way.

 

Slices in the export persona work independently of artboards, and artboards can be layered on top of each other.

One option is to create one big artboard for the common map and put the common content on it.  Create smaller artboards where you need unique content.

Slices can capture the images across all artboards.

The catch is that you need to hide the smaller artboards whose content you want to exclude from the individual slices when exporting them, so that could get old fast depending on how many of these you need to wrangle.

 

Again, this is likely solved by an adjustment in the slices feature: the ability to select which artboards to include content from when exporting the slice.

Thanks fde101 for the input. This is why Slices >might< be a solution, if tweaked some more. Because I do have to wrangle layers and content when exporting PDF for each 'page' anyway, sometimes. But here's the catch. It's so much easier to do that in the layers panel --while working on content-- than later in some other mode/persona. In AI I can set up marginalia and content for each separate page in a top-level layer...turn that stuff on, with the base stuff still on, and export and all is peachy. I know where my page margins are compared to content, etc. -- My example is relay race. Each leg of race has its part of the overall route, but it also has its leg's notes, mile marks, description and page title, leg number, etc. In AI, I just set that meta stuff over the content as part of the workflow, and then export. Easy. 

Going back and forth with slices would be a pain. (Just like going back and forth between Designer and Publisher just to do Spell check, imho, is a pita.) 

[Old Bruce]

The Export persona is great. With one caveat, we cannot make an export restricted to the artboard or canvas's boundaries. Another caveat is what you are attempting to do. Not simple but if you add a rectangle (instead of your artboard) in the Designer persona and name it something like "my Artboard analog" then you can draw a slice snapping to the slice you make from "my Artboard analog". That manually drawn slice will then include everything.

The lack of snapping in the Export persona is frustrating.

 

22 minutes ago, meridian360 said:

... (Just like going back and forth between Designer and Publisher just to do Spell check, imho, is a pita.) 

Do you not have the Text > Spelling > Check Spelling in Designer? it is here on Mac OS.

[meridian360]

8 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

The Export persona is great. With one caveat, we cannot make an export restricted to the artboard or canvas's boundaries. Another caveat is what you are attempting to do. Not simple but if you add a rectangle (instead of your artboard) in the Designer persona and name it something like "my Artboard analog" then you can draw a slice snapping to the slice you make from "my Artboard analog". That manually drawn slice will then include everything.

The lack of snapping in the Export persona is frustrating.

 

Do you not have the Text > Spelling > Check Spelling in Designer? it is here on Mac OS.

Old Bruce...I mistyped.. I have spell check. Sigh.. I meant >Find and Replace< text. That's what I meant. Going over to Publisher for that 'feature' that even TextPad from lo many years ago...yeah, my hides be chapped on that one. 

Anyway...ha...um. Ok, but with the Export persona... again, if my understanding is correct... You have to have a stroke attached to this "my Artboard analog"? That wouldn't work because it shouldn't show. I tried making a non-stroke non-fill box and it doesn't show in the Export persona? That would take making it visible each time, going back and forth, and then remembering to hiding it when you export each time. Not idea. 

And remember this still doesn't deal with the fact of how object interact in the Layers panel before you get to the export process. I really want to be able to share content across art boards/pages and not have things cropped. That's the take home message. How things get exported after that is just gravy. I want content in a roads layer to be accessible and flow across and up/down the workspace. With aD, as soon as you make that next page/art board, that content is sacred and cannot be shared. 

There might as well be only one artboard allowed. [shrug] Just seems incredibly limiting. Thanks everyone. 

[HCl]

.

[Old Bruce]

10 minutes ago, meridian360 said:

Old Bruce...I mistyped.. I have spell check. Sigh.. I meant >Find and Replace< text. That's what I meant. Going over to Publisher for that 'feature' that even TextPad from lo many years ago...yeah, my hides be chapped on that one. 

After I posted I thought "Wonder if it is Search and Destroy Find and Replace and not Spelling...??"

[Evaluation complete.]

@meridian360 here’s the issue: Affinity is fundamentally built on IT architecture rather than customer needs and workflows from the industry. This is a curse we’ll all have to endure unless, in some distant future, Serif decides to rebuild their programs differently - which seems highly unlikely.

Programs like Illustrator, CorelDRAW, Figma, and VectorStyler recognize real-world workflows and should work for you when it comes to artboards. These are the ones I lean towards for most of my work, except VectorStyler, which isn’t a serious option for a business setting.

In my experience, basing a business case on a product that requires workarounds drives you mad. They take more time, involve additional details to remember, and ultimately, they eat up any cost savings you hoped to gain from cheaper software - all while simultaneously draining the joy from your work.

[meridian360]

6 minutes ago, Ingelise said:

@meridian360 here’s the issue: Affinity is fundamentally built on IT architecture rather than customer needs and workflows from the industry. This is a curse we’ll all have to endure unless, in some distant future, Serif decides to rebuild their programs differently - which seems highly unlikely.

Programs like Illustrator, CorelDRAW, Figma, and VectorStyler recognize real-world workflows and should work for you when it comes to artboards. These are the ones I lean towards for most of my work, except VectorStyler, which isn’t a serious option for a business setting.

In my experience, basing a business case on a product that requires workarounds drives you mad. They take more time, involve additional details to remember, and ultimately, they eat up any cost savings you hoped to gain from cheaper software - all while simultaneously draining the joy from your work.

This is what I'm trying to wrap my noodle around. What aD does well, it does REALLY REALLY well. Opening PDFs, zooming in, snapping (mostly), content display, toolbar display. It's super smooth while panning, zooming and such, even with big files. The display engine seems to be super efficient. 

But then they just dig in when it comes to 'industry standard' stuff like Find/Replace Text, Selecting Objects, Moving Objects In and Around the Layer Panel. Just standard breaking ui/ux stuff that adds extra (or uh weird) steps to get production work done. 

There's such great potential for aD and the whole suite to be an Adobe killer. But these user facing workflow protocols that seem to be made up by committee just really seem to get in the way. I don't get it. Just moving objects from one layer to another is soooooo tedious compared to all other graphical program forefathers. Do aD users not know there's a better/faster way? Are there patent issues? Has no one come up with any other way? --- I keep using it on my personal stuff, to become more proficient with it, hoping for a breakthrough. But I keep finding tripping points that slow me down compared to AI and FH. (Select objects, click the 'move to top' button....but the layer panel is still showing you where you were, not at the top with your selected objects! Um...Hm... Maybe I moved them to the top for a reason? Because I now what to do something with them...they're still selected. Sigh. Or moving objects to another layer....only moves the objects in the Layer panel that are showing in the layer panel at that moment. Not all the selected objects, just the ones visible. Um....) Horse --> aD--> Water... aaaaahhhhhh....   

[Evaluation complete.]

These are precisely my experiences with Affinity: there are things I like, but I constantly encounter signs of an incredibly poor understanding of and engagement with workflows and general usability. My concern is that it seems to be a way of life for Serif to develop software with features designed entirely internally, without any connection to industry practices. When I see people here defending these features so adamantly, they often also show a lack of industry knowledge. As part of my research, I’ve scanned parts of this forum, and it has only reinforced my suspicion.

It doesn’t seem to be changing after more than 10 years of this approach, so I think you either have to get used to Affinity being developed with metaphorical earplugs on or vote with your feet. Based on my reading of forum members’ posts over the years, it seems things have only gotten worse over time, which is a really bad sign.

I’ve considered whether I might end up professionally at work using the standard programs alongside the rest of the industry while reserving Affinity for personal hobbies and some commercial side projects. However, I know it’s unwise to use different programs for the same purpose, experience tells me that one should focus on mastering and making the most of their primary tool, not fumbling around with multiple ones (KISS) and I can assure Serif that Affinity is not mature enough to be adopted by my workplace. Let’s see where I end up privately - I’m still evaluating, patiently. But also, annoyed.

[meridian360]

27 minutes ago, Ingelise said:

.....and I can assure Serif that Affinity is not mature enough to be adopted by my workplace. Let’s see where I end up privately - I’m still evaluating, patiently. But also, annoyed.

Yup. As it is right now, I simply can not use aD for paying work projects. Some things are just adjustments in habits (ie. rotating type: using just the type tool and then trying to precisely select the type object to move it into place vs. Rotate tool allowing for rotation at any point, then  temporarily switching to command key to select and move it into place, rinse and repeat. That's a habit change.) But, there's too many workflow tools and routines that are too slow compared to the elephant in the room. Those can't be overcome with just a change in habit. They are just slow, by default and no matter how many time you repeat them will they speed up. They're just slow/er. 

I'm not doing that to paying customers. 

[fde101]

Curiously, if you place objects behind artboards (so that they are not on any artboard but are independent of them), they do export with artboards which overlap them, but do not print.  If you place the common objects outside of the artboards, you can export the individual artboards with their unique content and the objects underneath them (which are then in common to all artboards), then print the exported files.

[HCl]

.