Jump to content
SteveP110

Release Image Frames from Master

Recommended Posts

If I setup a master page with images frames  (creating thumbnail type pages for an instruction  sheet) is there a way of adding an image to them when the master is applied to a page. I used this frequently in inDesign. Screen shot on left and text on right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the easiest way indeed. :)

  1. Create a master page and add your frames
  2. Apply the master page to your layout page
  3. Go to your layout page and open the Layers Panel
  4. Duplicate the master page contents in the layers list
  5. Hide the master page contents and use the duplicate to add your contents.

Hope that helps … :)

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont get bogged down with the thumbnail example. There are many situations in DTP /design where you may have many master pages and you wish to apply them but change certain aspects of a page ie images. This is easy in inDesign when you can just release a master object and change just that one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we know, that there are many things easier in InDesign (that is the reason, why I use InDesign CC in my every day layout work). But is is clueless to compare a beta(!) of version 1(!) of a new publisher with an application, which is established for decades.

And, sometimes it is worth while, to remember the exorbitant price gap between these applications …

So, my recommendation: Stay patient! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, mac_heibu said:

...But is is clueless to compare a beta(!) of version 1(!) of a new publisher with an application, which is established for decades...

Matter of fact, today (Aug 31) is the nineteenth anniversary of ID's release (if I recall). So ID 1.0 is 19 years older than APub's beta...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mac_heibu said:

...But is is clueless to compare a beta(!) of version 1(!) of a new publisher with an application, which is established for decades...

Actually, it is not clueless to do these comparison when there are like features in both applications. It's a lot easier to build a layout application if the people building a new one are clear as to why certain things are the way they are in the previously built applications. This is no more true than in a layout application.

Going about functionality in a "new" way is all fine and dandy when there is clear thinking about why the others implement those features in a certain manner. Once one is clear as to the why and the how the others work in a production environment, if there are ways to improve on that then do so. But if not? Then don't change a dang thing.

Two things I think are fundamentally wrong as a for instance. Not creating a master page when creating a new document is a change for the worse (aside from the master page margin bug). Not having a primary text frame that can be on a master page is a change for the worse. Just both of those "new ways" makes for any document longer than a few pages more onerous than it ought to be, much less something book length. And there are other things that could make APub better that are implemented in ways that don't make for a good work-flow.

Anyway, I've refrained from being very critical and should go back to that stance.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mac_heibu said:

But is is clueless to compare a beta(!) of version 1(!) of a new publisher with an application, which is established for decades.

I wouldn’t say it is clueless. People are testing Publisher to see (and hope) if it will work for them.

Most are presumably currently using InDesign. Therefore, pointing out areas where ID does things better is very helpful feedback for the team making Publisher. Some features will be considered essential by some and not important by others.

I think we all want Publisher to a) be as good as possible and b) be a success. Otherwise why are we here?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, what Mike has said, is the opposite of clueless. It simply does not make sense to forbid or forgo comparisons, even at a very early stage of a project. The discussed aspect is already implemented in the application and could have been easily implemented in a different way. Therefore, it must be allowed to compare it to existing workflows and point at its shortcomings. Now is the time to iron out initial quirks! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a discussion forum, not a critisism forum therefore the use of words like clueless is of little constructive use. Only by comparing a competing product will the designers get an idea of the prosepctive customers prefered use. Many software products do the same/similar tasks but in a different way or via a different route and consructive discussions are often the only way of finding out these routes or methods, especially in the early days of a new product. So I think the tone of some members of this forum, not just this thread are more personal rather than constructive.

Plus design is not always new and imaginative it is to learn from the old and improve. 

"And, sometimes it is worth while, to remember the exorbitant price gap between these applications …" does this infer that APub will be a Cheap and inferior item, if Designer and Photo are anything to go by that is definitly not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The use of master page is important, and if I they were more usefull the way they were implemented in QXP than they are in ID.

Text & picture frames stay linked to master pages but can be modified to a certain extend. Once modified (in the pages), modifications added on them in the master pages are applied on the pages…

I used a lot more master pages in QXD. With ID, they're only usefull for static/décorative stuff/page number :S

I hope APub master pages will have interesting features that we usually rely on and new ones we didn't think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, A_B_C said:

This is the easiest way indeed. :)

  1. Create a master page and add your frames
  2. Apply the master page to your layout page
  3. Go to your layout page and open the Layers Panel
  4. Duplicate the master page contents in the layers list
  5. Hide the master page contents and use the duplicate to add your contents.

Hope that helps … :)

Alex

 

Thanks Works fine, with a little experimentation I also found you have to turn off any still wanted Master Page items in the Master page Duplicate. Those items are then still controlled via the true Master Page. I think this method will also improve on the inDesign method in many cases

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MikeW said:

Once one is clear as to the why and the how the others work in a production environment, if there are ways to improve on that then do so. But if not? Then don't change a dang thing.

Very true, but it is also worth considering that for a new product like Affinity Publisher there is not necessarily anything already there to leave unchanged. They cannot nor should they try to copy the code of any other app, particularly one that does not attempt to meet the core design goals of the Affinity range of apps like a 'universal' native file format or very high memory efficiency.

Now that we have the first public beta to play with, it seems a bit clearer why some of the features of Designer & Photo were implemented as they first were, & why they have evolved as they have since then & presumably will continue to do so in the 1.7 versions & beyond.


Affinity Photo 1.7.3, Affinity Designer 1.7.3, Affinity Publisher 1.7.3; macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM
Affinity Photo 1.7.3.155 & Affinity Designer 1.7.3.1 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 13.1.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R C-R, nothing about "copy code" was written nor suggested.

Implementing master page primary frames is not copying code, it is simply a functionality that all layout applications worth using have/have had. Now, one could argue that they way Ventura did this is superior to ID or Q or whatever. And I would agree. But primary text frames doesn't require "copy code." Nor does emulating/improving upon any other function that other applications have long had. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, MikeW said:

R C-R, nothing about "copy code" was written nor suggested.

Well, I did write about that, but the point I was trying make by doing so was to suggest that we can't automatically assume there is any code already present in the Affinity apps that would support all the functions other apps have supported for a long time, or more importantly to do so without compromising any of the core design goals they want to preserve.


Affinity Photo 1.7.3, Affinity Designer 1.7.3, Affinity Publisher 1.7.3; macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM
Affinity Photo 1.7.3.155 & Affinity Designer 1.7.3.1 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 13.1.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R C-R, every layout application I have used over the years I have been doing layout work (that I can recall) has had such a capability from day one. It's not a novel thing. If Serif would have wanted to make these couple things (master pages, primary text frames) as per other layout applications they would have done so. Instead, Serif has chosen a novel approach that is not conducive to a work environment for books, manuals and the like.

Heck, even the automatic text flow is busted if one has asymmetrical or mirrored margins. This isn't a good thing. Now, I suspect this latter snafu will be worked out by release. At least I certainly hope so.

But the other two/three items? I'm just afraid it is "by design" and will not change to the standard and time-proven functionality. And if that is what happens then this will be unacceptable to a professional market--heck, these couple things will be ridiculed.

Have fun with supporting the way this works presently. It is a Micky Mouse implementation and enough for me to relegate the use of APub for brochures, short documents that are a pita in AD, and the like.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MikeW said:

Have fun with supporting the way this works presently. It is a Micky Mouse implementation and enough for me to relegate the use of APub for brochures, short documents that are a pita in AD, and the like.

??? It is a public beta, not intended for anything other than reporting bugs & getting feedback about the features users would like to see in the retail app.


Affinity Photo 1.7.3, Affinity Designer 1.7.3, Affinity Publisher 1.7.3; macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM
Affinity Photo 1.7.3.155 & Affinity Designer 1.7.3.1 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 13.1.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MikeW Personally I think it is too early to be this negative about it. It is the first beta. I expect a lot will change before it is released.

there are some things that it does which are light years ahead of InDesign. Things like the speed of scrolling at full ‘preview’ resolution ability to easily select individual pages of a placed PDF after being placed. 

Im sure there are other positives, as well as many negatives.

Just saying let’s not write it off yet based on a first Beta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, robinp said:

@MikeW Personally I think it is too early to be this negative about it. It is the first beta. I expect a lot will change before it is released.

there are some things that it does which are light years ahead of InDesign. Things like the speed of scrolling at full ‘preview’ resolution ability to easily select individual pages of a placed PDF after being placed. 

Im sure there are other positives, as well as many negatives.

Just saying let’s not write it off yet based on a first Beta.

I disagree. It is precisely at this stage to provide negative feedback. I've also given positive feedback and was about to do so in another thread.

Import even just 100 pages of just text (which is slightly convoluted in itself). Do the same in ID and/or QXP.

APub has the same performance issues as QXP (which also has a too soft of image preview due entirely to high zooming/rendering capabilities) can have that ID does not. I have no difficulty in selecting pages from a PDF to import in either QXP or ID. Being able to do so isn't unique in APub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MikeW said:

I disagree. It is precisely at this stage to provide negative feedback. I've also given positive feedback and was about to do so in another thread.

Import even just 100 pages of just text (which is slightly convoluted in itself). Do the same in ID and/or QXP.

APub has the same performance issues as QXP (which also has a too soft of image preview due entirely to high zooming/rendering capabilities) can have that ID does not. I have no difficulty in selecting pages from a PDF to import in either QXP or ID. Being able to do so isn't unique in APub.

I think you’re taking my comment as being against criticism. It is not. That is entirely the point about a beta. We have to provide feedback. 

I was referring to the parts of your post which sounded like there was little hope or that the problems you’re expeirencing are by design. I think it is too early to reach those kinds of (negative) conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, robinp said:

I think you’re taking my comment as being against criticism. It is not. That is entirely the point about a beta. We have to provide feedback. 

I was referring to the parts of your post which sounded like there was little hope or that the problems you’re expeirencing are by design. I think it is too early to reach those kinds of (negative) conclusions.

No worries. And my comments are based upon Serif coming back and saying that the present way of master pages and the lack of primary text frames are by design...I have seen little change to things when that statement has been made as regards the other applications. Serif has had at least some change later. The way text styles are implemented in APub is better than AD and I believe that was due to feedback. So while I do have some hope, based upon the past I don't have a lot of hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree wholeheartedly with MikeW posts here.
Master pages in Affinity Publisher is an area where Serif folks need to have another look.

I"m sure they want the best product out there so I'm confident that that will actually happen.

And yes, this is the first Beta. 9_9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to add my voice to this.

Master pages are like templates - which can have empty image and text frames - which are to be filled in on normal pages. That's the core idea going back decades.

Right now APub doesn't do this which is a real shame. I wish they had engaged with us earlier - some of us did ask, and tell them that an open dev process is better than design by closed committee. 

People have been kind enough to offer work around - thanks, but the core issue remains.

I thought I was going mad so I checked my sanity with another designer - and yes, this is a pretty deep gap.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.