Jump to content
Mensch Mesch

Affinity Publisher is not a copy of InDesign - no massive fail!

Recommended Posts

Lindblad, think of Affinity Publisher as a replacement for Affinity Designer. Designer with pages. That’s not being unfair, but rather to underscore the utility of Designer, now extended over pages. Designer and Publisher compete with each other, not with QXP or InDesign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ania said:

Lindblad, think of Affinity Publisher as a replacement for Affinity Designer. Designer with pages. That’s not being unfair, but rather to underscore the utility of Designer, now extended over pages. Designer and Publisher compete with each other, not with QXP or InDesign.

Absolutelly wrong. It is like you say "ID is replacement for AI". Every app has it purpose for being created.

  • Publisher is layout app.
  • Designer is vector based drawing app.
  • Photo is bitmap oriented drawing and photo app.

Best regards,

Petar Petrenko
Typesetter, Graphic Designer, Photographer
Skopje, Makedonija

Windows 10 x64 Pro
Dell Inspiron 7559 i7
Intel Core i7-6700HQ (3.50 GHz, 6M )
16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz (8GBx2)
1TB HDD + 128 GB SSD Hard drive
UHD (3840 x 2160) Truelife LED- Backlit Touch Display
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 4GB GDDR5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Petar Petrenko said:

Absolutelly wrong. It is like you say "ID is replacement for AI". Every app has it purpose for being created.

You are right... except I try to replace AI when ever it is possible with ID, as ID is so much friendlier to use... :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Fixx said:

You are right... except I try to replace AI when ever it is possible with ID, as ID is so much friendlier to use... :-D

I am not. I use vector app for vectors, bitmap for photo and layout to gather everything into one. So, I'd like every Affinity app to do strictly what is aimed to do, or to have one "swiss knife" app. But, it is much more real, dinosauruses to appear again than this to happen. :)


Best regards,

Petar Petrenko
Typesetter, Graphic Designer, Photographer
Skopje, Makedonija

Windows 10 x64 Pro
Dell Inspiron 7559 i7
Intel Core i7-6700HQ (3.50 GHz, 6M )
16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz (8GBx2)
1TB HDD + 128 GB SSD Hard drive
UHD (3840 x 2160) Truelife LED- Backlit Touch Display
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 4GB GDDR5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The functions of the apps inevitably overlap. This is not different with Adobe and can not be avoided synonymous. But the core features are already well recognizable in Affinity products. I have not yet used Designer and Photo for professional work. For my workflow, this is only when the entire suite is complete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2018 at 12:05 PM, Patrick Connor said:

Still 1.2K views is not to be sneezed at...  I may go and make a trash talk video myself ;)

Actually, because of this thread I looked for that video. This video made me try it for myself. I was drawing a strange shape, converting it to a picture frame, rotate it, scale it en could place an image inside it easily within 2 minutes. I was suprised this works and is so intuitive. So in the end what this video did to me was showing what Publisher already can do and surprise me by that. According to the comments on youtube I'm not the only one taking this time and being positive about Publisher, so perhaps it's not such a bad thing to have this video there and it could actually help Affinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think part of the issue some see is at this stage in tech development, things should be faster. Not saying I agree with this, but to be honest, that's how we have seen development happening, faster and faster. I think I heard about publisher 2 years or more ago, looked promising from discussions, but if you cannot even open an indesign file to test it or test export for digital content like ebooks, it is tough to say it looks promising. I believe those features should have been there for the beta, they make sense in that people will be comparing that way. How does this handle this indesign file I have, what breaks, what needs to change, etc. For ebooks, to not have even say just reflowable epub export seems odd not too mention they said they aren't even sure when that feature will be added or if it will, you'd think they have a roadmap to have an idea on features. 

Maybe it has potential or maybe it doesn't, but if key components aren't there for people to test, then they are less likely to say great things about something they cannot even test, it's not as relevant for them then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm new to the Affinity products. And only played some hours with APUB. When I saw the title and the first video of this thread, I thought "APub can't do this? Even "PageStream" in the late 80s was capable of doing this! Any picture could be put into any shape and transparency. Which itself could be converted to a text box again with the picture in the shaped background" Then I remembered in PageStream was a shortcut / menu to convert any shape into picture and / or text box. (Wasn't possible with Pagemaker nor Xpress at that time! The Print bureau where impressed by the features and speed of the app.)

So I checked the menus in APub and found and tried the "Convert picture to frame". It works easily.

Yes I see myself as an experienced amateur with DTP, though I use it everyday for my work. Already now APub has more features I need for my purposes. I used and learned  PageStream in 80/90s and used it until 2005. Later I used MS Publisher, Scribus and till now Pages on my Mac, because Pagestream isn't developed anymore, but had features Xpress and ID only got decades later or never like the datatypes concept: datatypes were used by the OS and made any fileformat available to any application. No need to reprogramm import or export filters. Just install the right Datatype and all apps could use it.

As for APub I like the speed of APub. As a beta version it is rather stable. I'm sure we will see more professional features for many pages documents. Be patient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2018 at 2:05 PM, Fixx said:

I would propose children master pages, which inherit the content from master1 (parent master) and have their own added content... using two master pages on one content page would be confusing.

A combination of both would be even better, that is, standalone MPs and Hierarchical MPs.

Being able to base your pages on a master mage and then on additional pages as per now would be a big win in my books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2018 at 3:05 PM, Fixx said:

APub would be very usable even without global layers. Proper layers would just make some tasks much easier for some people.

While master pages do not relate to layers discussion, I would propose children master pages, which inherit the content from master1 (parent master) and have their own added content... using two master pages on one content page would be confusing.

 

Hi Fixx,

I can't image what is the purpose of parent/children master pages. Can you give me an example how they could be used?


Best regards,

Petar Petrenko
Typesetter, Graphic Designer, Photographer
Skopje, Makedonija

Windows 10 x64 Pro
Dell Inspiron 7559 i7
Intel Core i7-6700HQ (3.50 GHz, 6M )
16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz (8GBx2)
1TB HDD + 128 GB SSD Hard drive
UHD (3840 x 2160) Truelife LED- Backlit Touch Display
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 4GB GDDR5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2018 at 9:22 AM, musiberti said:

From a "professional" point of view, I must agree to the the statement of the video. Even for a beta, the publisher is currently a bad publication, which unfortunately is likely to damage the previously impeccable reputation of Affinity. It's, at best, an early alpha version that better would not have been made public yet. Here in the forum some moderators try to turn the bugs into features. In my opinion, Affinity has just taken over the concept of AD and AP simply without any significant changes for DTP and layout purposes. But that does not even work. My main criticisms:

- Layers only affect the corresponding single page. Real layouters can not do without global layers.

- Master pages can not contain editable text frames or images. What is it good for?

- Bleed is neither visible nor exported properly. (I still have hope for this bug).

Unfortunately this list can be extended indefinitely.
Without adding tons of features, the publisher becomes just another gimmick for hobbyists and occasional users.

Working with workarounds is no alternative. A publisher must be one thing above all else: fast and effective.

As a professional, I can't necessarily agree that it is not production-ready. It depends on your workflow and if you are willing break out of your comfort zone. Many of the issues that the video complained about were non-issues as they were just presented differently than he was accustomed. When I first started using Affinity Products I sat down and went through the tools as I accepted that it was not going to replicate Adobe. I used InDesign from 1.0 and it had it flaws and quark "die-hards" had made many of the complaints that are being made about publisher. In my not so humble opinion,  Once you accept that alternative does not mean the product does not match adobe feature-for-feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Petar Petrenko said:

I can't image what is the purpose of parent/children master pages. Can you give me an example how they could be used?

This would be useful.

Think of a simple example with a parent master page with some details (running head, page number, other design elements), and then three child master pages: each for different common types of layout in your document: say one with a passepartout image, another with a full-page text frame, another with a chapter start page.  Then if you want to change the running head you can change the parent master page just once rather than all three (or more) master pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ This. Someone proposed that it would be useful to be able to apply several master pages to a content page to apply different master items to pages – I feel that would be confusing. Hierarchical parent/children master pages would be easier to use.

Still, I do not know if would be more trouble than worth... I have managed just fine with bunch of single master pages in my productions.

Share this post


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

Someone proposed that it would be useful to be able to apply several master pages to a content page to apply different master items to pages

I just checked, and you can actually do this in the current beta. So in my earlier example you could have one master for the head, one and one for each of the layout options, and a content page would have the head master plus one of the layout options.  In a way this could be more flexible than pure parent/child; you could have two different header style masters and two different body layout masters, and can mix and match to get 4 overall options, rather than having the child masters duplicated (if you see what I mean).

Neither way seems to cover all the bases but having played around a bit I actually think the way it works in the current beta is the best way imho.

Now if only they enabled placeholder content frames to master pages... :35_thinking:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cai said:

I just checked, and you can actually do this in the current beta. So in my earlier example you could have one master for the head, one and one for each of the layout options, and a content page would have the head master plus one of the layout options.  In a way this could be more flexible than pure parent/child; you could have two different header style masters and two different body layout masters, and can mix and match to get 4 overall options, rather than having the child masters duplicated (if you see what I mean).

Neither way seems to cover all the bases but having played around a bit I actually think the way it works in the current beta is the best way imho.

Now if only they enabled placeholder content frames to master pages... :35_thinking:

Yes, they will. :)


Best regards,

Petar Petrenko
Typesetter, Graphic Designer, Photographer
Skopje, Makedonija

Windows 10 x64 Pro
Dell Inspiron 7559 i7
Intel Core i7-6700HQ (3.50 GHz, 6M )
16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz (8GBx2)
1TB HDD + 128 GB SSD Hard drive
UHD (3840 x 2160) Truelife LED- Backlit Touch Display
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 4GB GDDR5

Share this post


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

Now if only they enabled placeholder content frames to master pages... :35_thinking:

Already possible…

117554736_AffinityDesyncMaster.gif.e5fc5017bda562e423cdab1634be5746.gif

  • 3 Pages.
  • Apply one Master.
  • Inset different image and text in to each page.
  • Rearrange text and image frames on Master.
  • All pages update to new layout.

How?

  • Unlock the Master layer on each page.
  • Toggle sync in the Symbols panel.
    • Sync off when working on Pages.
    • Sync on when working on the Master.

Alphabet.afpub


Win7 Ultimate x64   |   i5-3570K @ 3.4GHz   |   16 GB RAM   |   120 GB SSD   |   nVidia GTX 660 Ti   |   Huion 1060 Plus

 

ScreenToGIF (Open Source, Portable, ~610kB)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Aammppaa Well, this is great!

I can't quite get my head around symbols, and what properties of a frame are linked or unlinked between master and page when I make an edit on a page or on master... but i'm sure I'll figure it out eventually.

Thanks for the demo!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is merely something I discovered myself.

I assume it is where the app will go in future development.

For now it works, but is neither very user friendly, nor stable, as there are a fair few bugs connected with symbols.

Still, I find it of interest that the functionality that many are asking for is essentially all there under the hood.


Win7 Ultimate x64   |   i5-3570K @ 3.4GHz   |   16 GB RAM   |   120 GB SSD   |   nVidia GTX 660 Ti   |   Huion 1060 Plus

 

ScreenToGIF (Open Source, Portable, ~610kB)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aammppaa said:

Already possible…

 

  • 3 Pages.
  • Apply one Master.
  • Inset different image and text in to each page.
  • Rearrange text and image frames on Master.
  • All pages update to new layout.

How?

  • Unlock the Master layer on each page.
  • Toggle sync in the Symbols panel.
    • Sync off when working on Pages.  <------ WOW!
    • Sync on when working on the Master.

 

Um, wow.

Thanks. Thanks a bunch.


MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 10.12.6

Affinity Designer 1.6.1 | Affinity Photo 1.6.7 | Affinity Publisher beta 1.7.0.249 | Affinity Photo beta 1.7.0.110 | Affinity Designer Beta 1.7.0.4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aammppaa said:

Still, I find it of interest that the functionality that many are asking for is essentially all there under the hood.

Functionality void of efficient work-flows is of little use.

Aside from bug fixes to present functionality, my biggest hope is that work-flow procedures are reassessed and made to be efficient, streamlined. 


My computer is a nothing-special Toshiba laptop with unremarkable specs running Windows 10 64-bit.

Share this post


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

Already possible…

117554736_AffinityDesyncMaster.gif.e5fc5017bda562e423cdab1634be5746.gif

  • 3 Pages.
  • Apply one Master.
  • Inset different image and text in to each page.
  • Rearrange text and image frames on Master.
  • All pages update to new layout.

How?

  • Unlock the Master layer on each page.
  • Toggle sync in the Symbols panel.
    • Sync off when working on Pages.
    • Sync on when working on the Master.

Alphabet.afpub

It's very complicated. It must be as simple as in ID or Quark.

The same with "Save Defaults". Publisher must save all changes in the document to be prepared for any new document -- by default, not with extra command.


Best regards,

Petar Petrenko
Typesetter, Graphic Designer, Photographer
Skopje, Makedonija

Windows 10 x64 Pro
Dell Inspiron 7559 i7
Intel Core i7-6700HQ (3.50 GHz, 6M )
16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz (8GBx2)
1TB HDD + 128 GB SSD Hard drive
UHD (3840 x 2160) Truelife LED- Backlit Touch Display
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 4GB GDDR5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2018 at 7:25 AM, musiberti said:

No, I know that it's a beta. But the lack of global layers seems to be wanted. That let me believe various statements by moderators (in other threads) . I think that's a very big mistake, because ultimately it means that the publisher will never prevail in a professional environment.

I am by no means an novice I used page layout programs from Page-maker days. Magazines, Catalogues, Annual Reports, booklets I have worked on many multi-page publications. While I understand what you're describing. I think you're over-reaching when you say it won't prevail in a professional environment. It depends on the individual's workflow, Affinity is not Adobe and vise-versa. Two things, 1. Are you trying to force your expectations on the product? 2. When you compare apples to oranges you're setting yourself up for disappointment. Adobe is $600 US per year Affinity products are $50.00 each some level of expectation management is required.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, kirknurse said:

I am by no means an novice I used page layout programs from Page-maker days. Magazines, Catalogues, Annual Reports, booklets I have worked on many multi-page publications. While I understand what you're describing. I think you're over-reaching when you say it won't prevail in a professional environment. It depends on the individual's workflow, Affinity is not Adobe and vise-versa. Two things, 1. Are you trying to force your expectations on the product? 2. When you compare apples to oranges you're setting yourself up for disappointment. Adobe is $600 US per year Affinity products are $50.00 each some level of expectation management is required.

 

TonyB from Affinity has already announced that they are working on global layers. So I hope that everything will be fine - someday.

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

×