Scripting

[Lorox]

1 hour ago, thomaso said:

... while Serif was about start programming Affinity … this community delivered already. 15 years ago…

Good reminder! I've really loved the features Scriptographer had to offer within Illustrator, especially when working a bit more experimentally than usual. I'm actually happy that I've still got a working version of Illustrator CS5 with Scriptographer installed.

If such functionality could be added to  Affinity Designer it would be truly amazing!

[Jaroslav Bereza]

I hope that we can get scripting soon. We are big company and we could save a lot on licenses with Affinity. But we can't start using Affinity without script support. My personal preference is TypeScript and we need WebSockets.

[chradja]

Definitively, I would consider the publisher application for enterprise deployments as soon as it as a strong API (allowing developments not only of scripting, but also of plugins), and a server version then.
InDesign has won the war against Xpress because of that (One strong API for plugins, one strong API for scripting and a server version). Because nowadays a lot of solution provides semiautomatic publishing which generates pages (often catalogs) that are then finished and polished by creatives without worrying about correct content and focusing only on the look.

Edited March 1, 2021 by chradja

[chradja]

Regarding the scripting language, Javascript sounds to me the more modern approach:

Take a look here on how to embed a very performant engine (the one used by Nodejs) :

https://v8.dev

[Balt]

Same as my fellows, I would love to be able to use Publisher on a daily basis, but the lack of scripting is making the task impossible. I use about 10 scripts (javascript) that save hundreds of hours. Sorting paragraphs, formatting tables and so on. Absolutely a must have for being able to start challenging ID.

I'm keeping faith,

Good luck guys, keep it up !

[Marc Hoogerwerf]

Please add automation/scripting support to all 3 products. 

I would prefer Python but Javascript would also do.

[kimtorch]

It's been almost three years since my original post and not a word on progress or even possibilities from Affinity. Clearly automation isn't high on their priority list.

I'd imagine if there'd been internal discussion at Affinity they would have reached out (maybe privately) to some of the people here who have vast knowledge and experience scripting publishing apps.

Implementation and beta testing for a large scripting environment would be a huge undertaking and if it hasn't started now I have little faith it will be with us inside a couple of years. Sadly, I have little faith it's EVER going to happen.

Looking back on what I said early on, I'd be happy to have ANYTHING - even the bare basics -  just as evidence they actually might be doing something...

[loukash]

7 hours ago, kimtorch said:

I'd be happy to have ANYTHING - even the bare basics

The sad fact is that because Serif doesn't even use standard UI elements, on MacOS you can barely even utilize the system-wide UI scripting via AppleScript's System Events. Well, you can run menu commands, keyboard shortcuts and let it click here and there, but many nonstandard elements remain "invisible" and can be only accessed by clicking specific mouse coordinates relative to window bounds.

[MikeSalisbury]

Unfortunately, this is a difficult decision for them I'm sure. A scripting environment and object models is a very heavy-weight feature to develop, and there is a huge opportunity cost for Serif to choose this over other features that may appeal to a broader slice of their customer base. At this point it looks like Serif's product strategy is to go after folks who are unhappy with Adobe's pricing model with products that are good enough to replace them. I discovered Serif's products late enough in their development to find them already more than good enough (they are excellent, and better than Adobe's in many ways), but I'm sure that was not always the case. Until they see the scripting opportunity as big enough to grab more market share than adding more missing features, they won't (and shouldn't) bother. 

That said, I hope they aren't underestimating the market demand for such capabilities. I'd expect that many businesses automate their document production processes quite a bit, and there is likely a hurdle behavior where providing scripting would allow an entire org to adopt Serif products where they can't even consider them now. 

One sad thing is that this is exactly the kind of feature I develop at work -- user-facing development environments and object models -- and I'd be happy to help or consult on building this feature. But one person from outside the company isn't going to change their product development strategy. At this point the best we can do is to demonstrate and promote the demand for this feature and hope to get Serif to note it.

(Note that all of this presumes that they aren't currently working on it. It is a big feature and it will take significant time, so it's possible. But as a previous note said, I would think its development might have leaked by now.)

[Lorox]

Hi Mike,

this post of yours seems very considerate and I hadn't thought about it that way before. I guess that there a quite a few different reasons why present and (hopefully) future Affinity Users might welcome scripting abilities and which of these reasons might possibly be worthwile enough for Serif to really go for it. As they are in it for business and not primarily to please designers by offering them nice features which may be fun to play around it's only natural that any development costs must be evaluated against (estimated) returns from future sales once these functions are implemented and draw new users to the Affinity applications. So which users or which group of users do you target at a certain point in an app's evolution? Maybe at present they're targeting other users or groups of users to broaden their base in the creative community – and actually not primarily those who'd be most happy with scripting and automation abilities?

Being a freelance grapic designer I'd value scripting more or less for the creative and experimental possibilities it might offer (having e.g. loved Scriptographer with Adobe Illustrator). If I was running some bigger publishing business, doing comprehensive magazines, catalogs etc. I might very well have other, completely different preferences as to how scripting is brought to use in a daily workflow and the importance of those capabilities would certainly be judged on a very different scale.

That being said, I do hope that Serif will judge wisely how to use their resources and choose the proper strategies to keep their existing users and constantly win over new ones with features that are most needed by large enough key groups at the time given. In my opinion – even if there certainly are some things in any of the apps which do deserve to be improved or added – they have done a great job so far and it was something that's been bitterly needed to establish a viable professional alternative to the basic Adobe Design apps.

[angelhdz12]

1 hour ago, Lorox said:

Hi Mike,

this post of yours seems very considerate and I hadn't thought about it that way before. I guess that there a quite a few different reasons why present and (hopefully) future Affinity Users might welcome scripting abilities and which of these reasons might possibly be worthwile enough for Serif to really go for it. As they are in it for business and not primarily to please designers by offering them nice features which may be fun to play around it's only natural that any development costs must be evaluated against (estimated) returns from future sales once these functions are implemented and draw new users to the Affinity applications. So which users or which group of users do you target at a certain point in an app's evolution? Maybe at present they're targeting other users or groups of users to broaden their base in the creative community – and actually not primarily those who'd be most happy with scripting and automation abilities?

Being a freelance grapic designer I'd value scripting more or less for the creative and experimental possibilities it might offer (having e.g. loved Scriptographer with Adobe Illustrator). If I was running some bigger publishing business, doing comprehensive magazines, catalogs etc. I might very well have other, completely different preferences as to how scripting is brought to use in a daily workflow and the importance of those capabilities would certainly be judged on a very different scale.

That being said, I do hope that Serif will judge wisely how to use their resources and choose the proper strategies to keep their existing users and constantly win over new ones with features that are most needed by large enough key groups at the time given. In my opinion – even if there certainly are some things in any of the apps which do deserve to be improved or added – they have done a great job so far and it was something that's been bitterly needed to establish a viable professional alternative to the basic Adobe Design apps.

Designers want scripting to have fun around!?

https://tenor.com/view/gif-4558036

[Lorox]

27 minutes ago, angelhdz12 said:

Designers want scripting to have fun around!?

Sure, man! That's one aspect – possibly not the most important one, though, on a larger scale...

[MikeSalisbury]

It occurs to me that there's an opportunity here to appeal to Serif's apparent revenue model. Since the products are so cheap (for now), it may be that Serif is looking to make a platform play, where they develop a large-enough customer base to attract developers to an add-on market. We already see signs of that in their sales of textures, fonts, and brushes. What if they looked to open up these add-ons to other 'tools' as well? I could see access to an object model of the existing capabilities as important to this. e.g. I can imagine, on the low end, a plugin to 'sketchify' existing strokes to make them look hand-drawn, or on the high end, a 3d plugin where you can render a 3d model, possibly as part of a 3d animation package like Blender, in order to generate a 3d still or even a full 3d animation, modeled and animated outside but rendered by Designer or Paint. 

In any case, a large part of this would be the development of an object model api that they would expose to outside developers. A scripting interface would be an incremental step beyond that that they might consider as a way to better publicize their capabilities to those who might be interested in developing such paid plugins for their store. 

Anyway, just a thought.

-m

[Lorox]

29 minutes ago, MikeSalisbury said:

 

…

Hi Mike,

it's just a thought – as you say, but it's a thought I had myself as well some time ago (maybe at the time of version 1.5 of the Affinity Apps and before Publisher). It sort seemed to make sense for me to not bloat the apps with a ton of features that maybe a majority of ”standard“ users would never need but to open up the apps to 3rd party developers who could then offer special modules/plugins to cover the needs of designers/users specializing in certain fields where there's a demand for some advanced features which aren't necessarily needed by the average user.

Back then I had in mind the interesting and possibly quite useful addons/plugins which Astute Graphics were/are offering for Adobe Illustrator. I thought that being able to add some functionlity of that kind to Affinity Designer via some PlugIn – only for those who really need it (and would be willing to pay for it, too, of course) – would actually be quite nice! Given that, additionally, there are quite a lot of Photoshop plugins which unfortunately (for technical reasons I'm not knowing enough of) don't work in Affinity Photo, it may well be that once the Affinity Apps have a broad enough user base those developers might also consider to make their products work in AP eventually.

Looking at what is going on with brushes, textures etc. I feel some movement towards Affinity from various 3rd party developers which seems to indicate that the apps (or rather their users) are taken seriously by those who formerly only catered to Adobe apps and users. I find this quite encouraging.

[thomaso]

If only Serif would cause influencers switch to Affinity …

==========

About Olav Martin Kern's interest /engagement in Scripting & PlugIns a short note from a third-party developer …

https://www.siliconpublishing.com/blog/author/ole/

… and a basic info at Adobe Press:

[thomaso]

By the way (I don't know a proper thread to post this), since we occasionally discuss features & their indispensability for Affinity, this appears to be a quite handy collection:

Quote

Here is a link to view all new features of InDesign, Photoshop, and Illustrator since 1.0-CC, CS-CC, and CS6-CC respectively.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/indesign/very-handy-resources-from-james-wamser/td-p/6649275

Thanks to a response by David Creamer to Ole. (see above)
To browse through the documents you need to click the little hidden arrow icons far left/right … or download each as PDF to access their bookmarks offline … 

[michalmph]

On 3/11/2021 at 5:11 PM, MikeSalisbury said:

What if they looked to open up these add-ons to other 'tools' as well? I could see access to an object model of the existing capabilities as important to this. e.g. I can imagine, on the low end, a plugin to 'sketchify' existing strokes to make them look hand-drawn

I wrote this in another thread some time ago, I'm not against "Serif" way of doing things. If the equivalent of writing addons would provide the same features as scripting does in current Adobe pipelines, I'm all in for that. Doing things differently is good. It opens possibilities. As long as the features and the documentation allows us to mirror, migrate, or integrate with, the existing pipelines.

To me, the most important aspect of scripting is not about having fancy new design features. It's about reducing the time the humans need to waste on inhumane tasks. Identifying the error-prone, manual, repetitive and labour-intensive tasks, and automating them, so no one has to do them anymore, forever - and instead focus on the more enjoyable and fulfilling parts of desktop publishing and graphical design.

[kimtorch]

2 hours ago, michalmph said:

To me, the most important aspect of scripting is not about having fancy new design features. It's about reducing the time the humans need to waste on inhumane tasks. Identifying the error-prone, manual, repetitive and labour-intensive tasks, and automating them, so no one has to do them anymore, forever - and instead focus on the more enjoyable and fulfilling parts of desktop publishing and graphical design.

This is the key - Affinity are working on the tools and forgetting about the result (getting the job done). Here's an analogy. I have a really nice Dewalt cordless screwdriver. It's a fantastic tool I enjoy using but if I had to screw in 5000 screws it wouldn't matter how good the tool is the job becomes slow, boring and uneconomical. This is why companies use robotics in manufacturing - it's essentially mechanical scripting. 

No matter how pretty and elegant the interface, I don't want to have to have to create 100, 500, 1000 PDFs manually. Or manually place images, create boxes, format text and export to our RIPS. We do these tasks thousands of times a week (literally). This is why Affinity Publisher is just pipe dream for us right now.

[angelhdz12]

1 minute ago, kimtorch said:

This is the key - Affinity are working on the tools and forgetting about the result (getting the job done). Here's an analogy. I have a really nice Dewalt cordless screwdriver. It's a fantastic tool I enjoy using but if I had to screw in 5000 screws it wouldn't matter how good the tool is the job becomes slow, boring and uneconomical. This is why companies use robotics in manufacturing - it's essentially mechanical scripting. 

No matter how pretty and elegant the interface (tool), I don't want to have to have to create 100, 500, 1000 PDFs manually. Or manually place images, create boxes, format text and export to our RIPS. We do these tasks thousands of times a week (literally). This is why Affinity Publisher is just pipe dream for us right now.

This! 🙌🔥💪😍☕️🏆🥇

[thomaso]

[ off topic ] … A place to experience (learn?) 'simple' scripting with ready made snippets:  https://play.ertdfgcvb.xyz/

[fde101]

On 3/25/2021 at 8:06 PM, kimtorch said:

It's a fantastic tool I enjoy using but if I had to screw in 5000 screws it wouldn't matter how good the tool is the job becomes slow, boring and uneconomical.

Yet no matter how good the automation is it would be worthless if it could only drive screws and you were provided a box full of nails.

It's all important.

[loukash]

On 3/26/2021 at 1:06 AM, kimtorch said:

We do these tasks thousands of times a week (literally).

If so, you will likely be able to afford hi-end software that can do the job for you the way you need. Right?

On 3/26/2021 at 1:06 AM, kimtorch said:

Here's an analogy. I have […]

… piles of equipment and archive boxes to move from one studio location to another, but I am too tightfisted to rent a van, so I'll rather move everything piece by piece with my bike trailer.
(True story! )

Edited May 5, 2021 by loukash
wrong word – lost in translation

[chessboard]

13 minutes ago, loukash said:

If so, you will likely be able to afford hi-end software that can do the job for you the way you need. Right?

Now, what's your point? Affinity isn't for demanding tasks? Well, then stop crying about "Schmadobe" and "Ill-Frustrator". At least they deliver.

In my opinion Affintiy/Serif has just two ways they could go: either go really big and power the software up for high demanding tasks, or stay in the niche as a software for the SoHo-Business. As for now they are just a dog pissing at an dinosaurs (Adobe's) leg. But the hype arround a new kid on the block doesn't hold for ever. The longer it takes for Affinity to get on par with Adobe, the less attention they'll get. And in the end they will end up where their predecessors (DrawPlus etc.) were.

[loukash]

1 minute ago, chessboard said:

Now, what's your point? Affinity isn't for demanding tasks?

If you need to "screw in 5000 screws" now, then it obviously isn't. (Yet?)

2 minutes ago, chessboard said:

Well, then stop crying

I'd beg to differ between "crying" and being snarky.

27 minutes ago, chessboard said:

"Schmadobe" and "Ill-Frustrator". At least they deliver.

And they better do, given their cost.

If I were working at that large scale, I would have likely had to accept their subscription model to get my jobs done. At that scale, it might even be a good model.

But this is not how I work, and thus it never was worth the investment. For the record: my Adobe upgrade path wasn't continuos, skipping CS1, CS2, CS4, CS5 and CS6, ending with CS5.5, i.e. usually taking the last chance in the discounted upgrade path. Even that was slightly over my budget (as in: turnover minus costs) but I haven't had another option. Until the Affinity suite was completed with Publisher, that is.

As far as I'm concerned, Affinity now delivers way more for the price than what I would have expected: Looking back, having invested about USD 100 into the suite since 2014 while taking advantage of various early adopter and public beta tester discount offers, that money was well spent, after all.

Look, I would like to have scripting as much as anyone else (as long as it would be AppleScript, that is), but I can get my work done without just as well.

14 minutes ago, chessboard said:

stay in the niche as a software for the SoHo-Business

Yep, this is where I want them to be as a "soho" customer.

Now… if only Serif would finally fix all those long acknowledged bugs…

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, loukash said:

Look, I would like to have scripting as much as anyone else (as long as it would be AppleScript, that is), but I can get my work done without just as well.

Please, anything but AppleScript. While I have very fond memories of AppleScript, Apple isn't exactly investing in its future. Even OmniGroup have recently switched to using JavaScript for automation within their apps. Either Python (my preference), JavaScript or even Lua, please.