Jump to content
sportyguy209

Resource Manager Bug and Link Suggestions

Recommended Posts

Just downloaded the latest Mac beta and when you click on the yellow button on Mac for the Resource Manager to hide it, you can't get it to reappear. Going to Window and choosing it's window shows it briefly, but then it disappears again.

That said, I would really prefer for Resource Manager (or links) to be a panel and available full time! PLEASE!

And, the default for Image Placement Policy should be Linked, not Embedded. Most people who do DTP are going to assume this and there are many good reasons to do it this way: Smaller file size, protection against losing graphics on crash, group and individual image modification without having to re-embed graphics, etc.

 Finally, while it is nice that you added a warning for missing graphics on open, there should be an icon on any missing graphic in a document, so they are easily to spot throughout a document.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sportyguy209 said:

Just downloaded the latest Mac beta and when you click on the yellow button on Mac for the Resource Manager to hide it, you can't get it to reappear. Going to Window and choosing it's window shows it briefly, but then it disappears again.

I can confirm that problem, & also that there is (& has been for years) the same problem in Photo & Designer with (all?) the secondary windows that have a yellow minimize-to-Dock button, like for Layer FX & Brush Editing. I reported this several years ago, but I guess it fell through the cracks.

I suppose the simplest fix is to disable everything besides the red close button on these windows (which is what some of them already do) but I learned a long time ago to avoid clicking on the yellow buttons on the secondary windows that have them.


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

It is interesting,

And I would like to write, I like the Resource Manager.
I don't use the small color buttons on the left upper corner still they are not color. The Close button work correct. The window is floating. It is possible to working on the document and having the Resource Manager opened.

Yes, I agree, It will be better the default Image placement policy is Linked. I would like to tell The possibility of choice between the Linked and Embedded is wonderful.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar but more serious problem. I cannot open Resource manager anymore.

I select it from the Document menu. Focus shifts away from the main window but nothing then appears. If I check the Window menu, it lists the main document window and the resource manager. There is nothing I can do to find the resource manager.

With reference to the original post here, I haven't been able to minimise the Resource Manager because it has never appeared.

One thing that did occur, when placing an image immediately on opening this new beta, Publisher offered a new option to Link the file instead of Embed it. This is definitely good and progress in the right direction but I wonder if this is the cause of the problem in some way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, sportyguy209 said:

That said, I would really prefer for Resource Manager (or links) to be a panel and available full time! PLEASE!

And, the default for Image Placement Policy should be Linked, not Embedded. Most people who do DTP are going to assume this and there are many good reasons to do it this way: Smaller file size, protection against losing graphics on crash, group and individual image modification without having to re-embed graphics, etc.

 Finally, while it is nice that you added a warning for missing graphics on open, there should be an icon on any missing graphic in a document, so they are easily to spot throughout a document.

Thanks!

+1


--------------------

iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, 2017) • Radeon Pro 580 8192 MB • macOS High Sierra

Share this post


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

Similar but more serious problem. I cannot open Resource manager anymore.

I select it from the Document menu. Focus shifts away from the main window but nothing then appears. If I check the Window menu, it lists the main document window and the resource manager. There is nothing I can do to find the resource manager.

With reference to the original post here, I haven't been able to minimise the Resource Manager because it has never appeared.

One thing that did occur, when placing an image immediately on opening this new beta, Publisher offered a new option to Link the file instead of Embed it. This is definitely good and progress in the right direction but I wonder if this is the cause of the problem in some way?

It turns out it was opening in a position so that it was virtually off screen. Just one tiny corner of it was visible. 

Seems like a bit of a bug to me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sportyguy209 @elektronek

 

I disagree that the preferred image placement should be linked by default. It should be Embedded because its the simpler method no matter how many benefits the Link method may offer. Ideally the app should just recall your last selection every time you start a new document. Problem solved.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, rjvela82 said:

@sportyguy209 @elektronek

 

I disagree that the preferred image placement should be linked by default. It should be Embedded because its the simpler method no matter how many benefits the Link method may offer. Ideally the app should just recall your last selection every time you start a new document. Problem solved.

 

I think it is important that Publisher works in a similar way to other DTP apps in these fundamental concepts.

Linking is probably the major reason many people use DTP apps over other solutions. It allows for many things, some are 

- Team working. People can be working on artwork while others work on the layout. Embedded files fundamentally do not allow this.

- File sizes stay low. Very important on large, image heavy documents.

- Linked to above, it allows for files to be opened and saved quickly with each save / version not taking up loads of space on a back up

- Easy replacement of artwork. Not only can artwork be updated on the fly (by others) you can easily have placeholder artwork which then you just overwrite with final files when they are complete. This allows for a document to be storyboarded early.

Quite simply a DTP app that isn’t fundamentally based around linked files is not targeting professional, team based production environments. Perhaps it might work for individuals, but not teams or more complex workflows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@robinp

The Linking feature exists. The discussion is not whether it exists or doesn't its whether it should be the default option when starting a project. No one is denying the usefulness of linking but unless the application remembers your last setting the default method should be the simpler mode. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, rjvela82 said:

@robinp

The Linking feature exists. The discussion is not whether it exists or doesn't its whether it should be the default option when starting a project. No one is denying the usefulness of linking but unless the application remembers your last setting the default method should be the simpler mode. 

All Affinity apps have had an issue with sticky settings and still do. Very difficult to use many things since very little of a person's settings and prefs stay, and that really needs to be worked on in all the apps.

That said, linked files have been the mainstream setting since Pagemaker when it all started and, as stated, is a fundamental for an app like this. If an individual wants to use embedded, it is there to be used. And, yes, it should stay sticky as a pref. But it should not be the default. 


--------------------

iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, 2017) • Radeon Pro 580 8192 MB • macOS High Sierra

Share this post


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

All Affinity apps have had an issue with sticky settings and still do. Very difficult to use many things since very little of a person's settings and prefs stay, and that really needs to be worked on in all the apps.

That said, linked files have been the mainstream setting since Pagemaker when it all started and, as stated, is a fundamental for an app like this. If an individual wants to use embedded, it is there to be used. And, yes, it should stay sticky as a pref. But it should not be the default. 

Yes. Agreed. I would argue that most people who want embedded artwork would probably be better off using pages. Not everyone, but most. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, nwhit said:

That said, linked files have been the mainstream setting since Pagemaker when it all started and, as stated, is a fundamental for an app like this. If an individual wants to use embedded, it is there to be used. And, yes, it should stay sticky as a pref. But it should not be the default. 

Link files have been mainstream since before Pagemaker. What's your point. The same can be said in reverse, if you want to use Linking, its there to be used. Why should it not be the default? Because the setting has existed since bygone days? Not the best reason because the Linking option is an advanced option used mostly in networking, and asset management processes which are not requirement processes in themselves to use Publisher.  

@robinp

You seem to think Embedded graphics in Publisher make no sense at all. Embedded graphics has nothing to do with why someone would choose Publisher or Pages. The reason someone needs to use Publisher over Pages is being able to set Master styles to reuse over and over again. It's got nothing to do with how professional a user needs to be to pick either one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I’m concerned it is THE most important feature of DTP. It has been an option to embed images in other apps. I see no reason why it shouldn’t remain as an option. 

The starting point really has to be linked. I have no problem with embedding being an option. I have a massive problem with it being the default. 

Imagine a company of 50 or 100 or 1000 people who may all use publisher. They are working across a large network. Perhaps in different offices. You need the default behaviour to be linking in such an environment. You need it to be foolproof so that one user doesn’t start accidentally embedding instead of linking.

I’m not sure why you consider linking to be complicated. It is a simple concept. DTP is not simple like sending an email, there are lots of complex aspects to it. Many of which I expect I will not ever understand. Linking isn’t one of them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you but your scenario doesn't disqualify my argument, but you're right so if Publisher wants to be the respectable app it wants to be than the option should be sticky so no matter who uses it, the last option used is the default option. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine having an organisation of 1000 people. Likely working in teams, therefore needing linking rather than embedding. It would only take one person to accidentally embed rather than link and it will create an IT query: “why aren’t my images updating”. Imagine trying to make sure 1000 people continue to use the app properly (for the organisation) when it’s default is the wrong setting. It would be a nightmare. 

Happy for the setting to be sticky, but the default has to be linking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still disagree that out of the box the default should be linking. Suppose Publisher reaches 500,000 users. Out of these how many represent 1000 people organizations that will drop Adobe Indesign and Adobe InCopy, and InDesign Server trifecta of DTP apps to use Affinity Publisher?  I'm seriously asking because if you want to talk about real large organization DTP solutions, well then back it up because while I'd like to see Publisher become an amazing product for all professionals, I just don't think their target market is large organizations. I think their target market are the freelancers, the professionals in middle management who currently use Adobe because there's nothing else that makes their life a little easier. Like I said, Sticky is the best solution but dropping the hammer on the Default option needing to be linking is misguided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rjvela82 said:

I still disagree that out of the box the default should be linking. Suppose Publisher reaches 500,000 users. Out of these how many represent 1000 people organizations that will drop Adobe Indesign and Adobe InCopy, and InDesign Server trifecta of DTP apps to use Affinity Publisher?  I'm seriously asking because if you want to talk about real large organization DTP solutions, well then back it up because while I'd like to see Publisher become an amazing product for all professionals, I just don't think their target market is large organizations. I think their target market are the freelancers, the professionals in middle management who currently use Adobe because there's nothing else that makes their life a little easier. Like I said, Sticky is the best solution but dropping the hammer on the Default option needing to be linking is misguided.

There are a lot of organisations that aren’t big publishers that currently use InDesign regularly and by large numbers of staff.

We are in the construction industry. Most architects like us have to know numerous complex computer programmes. There really isn’t the time or money to get everyone fully trained on every piece of software.

I’d have thought that would be a perfect market. No one likes having to spend ~£50+ a month on creative suite when it is one of many expensive software suites we need. But at the moment, Creative Cloud / Suite is essential, or has been until now / soon.

I can see no downside to having the default being linked files. I can only see upsides to avoiding partly or untrained users doing dumb things when working in large teams.

You mentioned earlier that I don’t appear to understand the benefits for embedding. You are right. I don’t. As far as I’m concerned, there are only downsides. 

Share this post


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

Happy for the setting to be sticky, but the default has to be linking. 

How about a preference to set either embedded or linked as the default new document behavior, so users could decide for themselves which best suits their needs?

It that was included in the app, I think the retail, out-of-box default should be embedded. That is because for a large company, the licenses probably would be bought from Serif with a method provided for pre-configurable multi-seat deployment so every user is starting with the same preferences, whereas in SOHO, freelancer, & similar environments that would not be.

Just a thought...


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
2 minutes ago, R C-R said:

How about a preference to set either embedded or linked as the default new document behavior, so users could decide for themselves which best suits their needs?

It that was included in the app, I think the retail, out-of-box default should be embedded. That is because for a large company, the licenses probably would be bought from Serif with a method provided for pre-configurable multi-seat deployment so every user is starting with the same preferences, whereas in SOHO, freelancer, & similar environments that would not be.

Just a thought...

Maybe, but why embedded over linked? I just don’t get it. Linked is inherently more powerful and flexible. It is a great selling point of the software (or will be once it works properly)

Share this post


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

You mentioned earlier that I don’t appear to understand the benefits for embedding. You are right. I don’t. As far as I’m concerned, there are only downsides. 

The big upside is it creates self-contained files that are 100% portable. That can be important for 'road warriors' who might not otherwise have access to all their linked files, & for SOHO, freelancer, & similar users who want simple, more 'goof-proof' backup solutions.


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
23 hours ago, sportyguy209 said:

That said, I would really prefer for Resource Manager (or links) to be a panel and available full time! PLEASE!

And, the default for Image Placement Policy should be Linked, not Embedded. Most people who do DTP are going to assume this and there are many good reasons to do it this way: Smaller file size, protection against losing graphics on crash, group and individual image modification without having to re-embed graphics, etc.

 Finally, while it is nice that you added a warning for missing graphics on open, there should be an icon on any missing graphic in a document, so they are easily to spot throughout a document.

+1


iMac 27" with macOS Mojave (German)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, R C-R said:

The big upside is it creates self-contained files that are 100% portable. That can be important for 'road warriors' who might not otherwise have access to all their linked files, & for SOHO, freelancer, & similar users who want simple, more 'goof-proof' backup solutions.

OK I can now understand the use. I can’t believe this is a big market though. Who really works primarily in this way? I can imagine odd situations where travelling to a meeting or something when having all the files embedded could be useful in order to be able to make last minute alterations.

BUT, I think it would be much clearer for it to be an export option, a bit like exporting to a packaged InDesign file but it could be all self contained in a single file. I just don’t think the dangers of embedding being used incorrectly should be outweighed by the marginal and occasional benefits for a few lone rangers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to all the good reasons for linking graphics, there are two big negatives against embedding: updated graphics and potential for document corruption.

Updated Graphics: Once the embedded graphic has been added, any change to the original graphic(s) will not be included. That could be very confusing for the user and problematic for a client.

Potential for Document Corruption: The more graphics, the larger the file size of the document, and the increased potential for file corruption.

That said, I have no problem with an option to allow embedding, but I feel strongly that the greatest potential market will need the application to work with linked graphics. And, as such, the default should be linked with the option of embedding. For a user traveling, even if they had originally chosen linked graphics, and they want graphics embedded, they could always save their work as a pdf.

I'm sure Affinity is not investing all their time and efforts into reaching a small number of mom and pop desktop publishers who have been using Microsoft Word or Microsoft Publisher. The features and capabilities of Publisher need to be focused on the professional market (those who would replace InDesign and XPress) of consultants, marketers, art directors, designers, etc. whether they work for themselves or in an agency/company.

But Affinity also needs to add an icon for any missing graphic in a linked file. We need a visual icon for any missing or changed graphic along with the ability to quickly fix it through a control click or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, robinp said:

BUT, I think it would be much clearer for it to be an export option, a bit like exporting to a packaged InDesign file but it could be all self contained in a single file. I just don’t think the dangers of embedding being used incorrectly should be outweighed by the marginal and occasional benefits for a few lone rangers. 

A package for finished projects to archive...

On the mac side this would be great if it used the native file package format. A macOS file package is a disguised folder containing all the parts. As an App usually is (right click on any .app - view package contents) This way, if file corruption happens, you could retrieve all the other parts. And backup programs can be faster as they only copy the changed objects inside the package.


  • Production-System: iMac (21,5-inch, Late 2013), 16GB RAM, 2TB nvme-SSD, running on 10.14.5 Mojave;
  • Display Setup: 27" Thunderbolt Display primary + 21,5" iMac-Display secondary for palettes;
  • Keyboard-Layout: German apple extended keyboard (aluminum);

 

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.