Jump to content
wonderings

Why can't a PDF just be placed without option to edit?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

Matching feature for feature is simply adding features without purpose.  That leads to bloat and is not a good approach to software design.

 

All those features have a purpose, not having them is far worse. You may not use them all, I could do way more with Indesign and the rest of the apps I am sure. I grew into certain things and very glad those features were there. One big one that has its own thread is the ability to data merge (Publisher needs to on release). This is not a bloated unnecessary feature, it is actually a very important and crucial feature to compete against an incredibly well refined app. Not matching feature for feature will lead to an app that is not capable of meeting the needs of professionals. Affinity can add its own twist, do it the Affinity way, but they cannot ignore them if they want a viable app for pro needs. When it comes down to someone looking to buy they are going to look for software that does everything and more then they need. Going down feature for feature between Publisher and Indesign you see Indesign is a clear winner (not fair at the moment I know as Publisher is in beta). As a business I am not going to buy Publisher because it is cheaper, I am going to buy the software that does what I need and possibly more. As I mentioned in a previous post I would happily pay what Adobe was charging for apps before the subscription service became mandatory. 

Share this post


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

As to your PS, You mean the mention of CorelDraw? PhotoLine? GhostScript? Or do I need to go back further in the thread?

All I mean is discussing things in this specific forum without knowing if or how they are relevant to Macs, the Mac OS, or the Mac version of Publisher can cause confusion.


Affinity Photo 1.7.1 & Affinity Designer 1.7.1; macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM
Affinity Photo 1.7.0.135 & Affinity Designer 1.7.0.9 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iOS 12.3.1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fde101 said:

Matching feature for feature is simply adding features without purpose.  That leads to bloat and is not a good approach to software design.

 

I have to agree with you. Alot of people think Affinity needs to compete with or replace Adobe. Serif doesn't need to do this. Affinity apps are 50 bones with no subscription. It would be considered a success to take 5% of Adobe's marketshare with 70% of its features. If you don't like it, keep using Adobe products.

@wonderings

PS. If you think I'm bluffing about that 5%, consider Designer has 1 million users and Serif considers it a success. Now find out how many people use Adobe products. Somewhere north of 250 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rjvela82 said:

Now find out how many people use Adobe products. Somewhere north of 250 million.

Somewhere about 12 to 15 million cc subscribers. Which is/was about the number of perpetual license holders at the time cc became all that was possible. 

Adobe makes more, far more, money off its other endeavors. 


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
15 hours ago, rjvela82 said:

I have to agree with you. Alot of people think Affinity needs to compete with or replace Adobe. Serif doesn't need to do this. Affinity apps are 50 bones with no subscription. It would be considered a success to take 5% of Adobe's marketshare with 70% of its features. If you don't like it, keep using Adobe products.

@wonderings

PS. If you think I'm bluffing about that 5%, consider Designer has 1 million users and Serif considers it a success. Now find out how many people use Adobe products. Somewhere north of 250 million.

Personally I would like to see REAL competition for Adobes software.  I do not want to settle for subpar software just to keep the price down. With that you will get sub par software. It will be OK but it will never be a mainstay application used by professionals as they would then need to find software to do the other things Publisher cannot and Indesign can. 

Charge $500 for the software or a $1000, just bring the features needed to make this a pro application. Striving to keep the price down will keep the features down that are necessary for a page layout application. They are in a good place for a beta but it is far from finished. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wonderings said:

...Charge $500 for the software or a $1000, just bring the features needed to make this a pro application. Striving to keep the price down will keep the features down that are necessary for a page layout application. They are in a good place for a beta but it is far from finished. 

I have always thought the price for Affinity products was set too low to begin with. But it is far easier to move upwards in price than downwards.

Be that as it may, Serif has shown that in the long term they are able to compete (PagePlus). But the perception of PP was never that of the Affinity line of applications. Because they are moving forward at a decent pace and have maintained a perception of pro-level software, I think Serif has plenty of time to improve, add to, etc., Affinity Publisher. Certainly over the next few years they can maintain this momentum of perception. 

What happens in the longer term is wholly up to Serif.


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
22 hours ago, MikeW said:
34 minutes ago, MikeW said:

I have always thought the price for Affinity products was set too low to begin with. But it is far easier to move upwards in price than downwards.

You may have alot of people agreeing with you on that point, but one would also think there was some market research involved. My guess is that there was because after Designer, Photo and now Publisher don't seem like an afterthought. This was planned from the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rjvela82 said:

You may have alot of agreeing with you on that point, but one would also think there was some market research involved. My guess is that there was because after Designer, Photo and now Publisher don't seem like an afterthought. This was planned from the beginning.

Yes, but that doesn't mean the market research led to a $50 conclusion. Market research always has multiple outcomes. One needs to follow the different paths to understand the why of the outcomes.

We all, right along with Serif, will get to see where this all leads.


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
1 hour ago, MikeW said:

I have always thought the price for Affinity products was set too low to begin with. But it is far easier to move upwards in price than downwards.

Be that as it may, Serif has shown that in the long term they are able to compete (PagePlus). But the perception of PP was never that of the Affinity line of applications. Because they are moving forward at a decent pace and have maintained a perception of pro-level software, I think Serif has plenty of time to improve, add to, etc., Affinity Publisher. Certainly over the next few years they can maintain this momentum of perception. 

What happens in the longer term is wholly up to Serif.

Honestly I had never heard of PagePlus before Serif released Designer and Photo and I looked at the forums here.  I hope they do honestly want to compete and do listen to what professionals who use their competitions software WANT and NEED in a page layout program. If not they will be the bargain bin application for a lot of amateur work. That being said looking at it now I would rather take a file made in Publisher then in Publisher... Microsoft that is. Still hate that they chose the name Publisher, one of the most reviled names in print thanks to Microsoft. 

Share this post


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

Honestly I had never heard of PagePlus before Serif released Designer and Photo and I looked at the forums here.  I hope they do honestly want to compete and do listen to what professionals who use their competitions software WANT and NEED in a page layout program. If not they will be the bargain bin application for a lot of amateur work. That being said looking at it now I would rather take a file made in Publisher then in Publisher... Microsoft that is. Still hate that they chose the name Publisher, one of the most reviled names in print thanks to Microsoft. 

I think that Serif has its own vision for how APub should work, and that includes work-flow issues and functionality. Serif does listen. But oft times how I, you or others think APub should function or what functionality should be present does not and will not override their perception of things. This is true of nearly every company I have ever dealt with—even when I have been the chief architect and programmer of vertical-market software. My client(s) have oft time overridden what and how I planned to develop the software because they were, after all, the actual boss.

As regards MS Publisher? Since it was released I have gotten MS Pub files from clients. I've never had issues with output at a level that rivals more professional software. I think that how it works has a parallel lesson to be learned/appreciated to APub. It is different enough that it both earned its reputation and was relegated to a much hated piece of software...but that feeling of being a non-professional piece of software exceeded reality.


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
4 minutes ago, MikeW said:

I think that Serif has its own vision for how APub should work, and that includes work-flow issues and functionality. Serif does listen. But oft times how I, you or others think APub should function or what functionality should be present does not and will not override their perception of things. This is true of nearly every company I have ever dealt with—even when I have been the chief architect and programmer of vertical-market software. My client(s) have oft time overridden what and how I planned to develop the software because they were, after all, the actual boss.

As regards MS Publisher? Since it was released I have gotten MS Pub files from clients. I've never had issues with output at a level that rivals more professional software. I think that how it works has a parallel lesson to be learned/appreciated to APub. It is different enough that it both earned its reputation and was relegated to a much hated piece of software...but that feeling of being a non-professional piece of software exceeded reality.

It is incredibly important for anyone developing software for a market that is already there to listen to the needs of that community. The daily users will have far more experience with apps both good and bad then most developers and company support for that app. Goes with most thing like that, I know more about what our digital press can handle and can do then the techs we call in to service it. They have been amazed at some of the things we run through with no issue and some of the issues or suggestions that would make it a much better machine. Those things they would never think of because they are not using it as an end user would use it.

Serif definitely has their own way of doing things and I have no issue with it despite finding some simple things difficult to do (just a learning curve for new software when used to Adobe). I think Affinities colour panels are atrocious and overly complex, but they do the job and others will have no issue with it I am sure. As long as the job can get done and you can accomplish what needs to be done everything else can be learned. The important thing is to be able to capable of what needs done in the application. 

Share this post


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

It is incredibly important for anyone developing software for a market that is already there to listen to the needs of that community. The daily users will have far more experience with apps both good and bad then most developers and company support for that app. Goes with most thing like that, I know more about what our digital press can handle and can do then the techs we call in to service it. They have been amazed at some of the things we run through with no issue and some of the issues or suggestions that would make it a much better machine. Those things they would never think of because they are not using it as an end user would use it.

Serif definitely has their own way of doing things and I have no issue with it despite finding some simple things difficult to do (just a learning curve for new software when used to Adobe). I think Affinities colour panels are atrocious and overly complex, but they do the job and others will have no issue with it I am sure. As long as the job can get done and you can accomplish what needs to be done everything else can be learned. The important thing is to be able to capable of what needs done in the application. 

I think the time has passed for seriously considering a wide(r) range of professional input from outside sources if that wasn't done a few years ago. I don't know whether it was done. To me it doesn't appear so, but I have no idea what went into the planning nor by whom. So basically it doesn't matter at this point as so much is baked in already for what is present and how it works.

Sort of, anyway. How text styles work has been changed from how they worked in AD. Now, I still don't like some of the decisions and I believe more can be done. I believe how color works was bad in AD and as it has been carried forward into APub is even worse for a layout application.

Anyway, this is my last post for this topic.

Mike


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
55 minutes ago, wonderings said:

It is incredibly important for anyone developing software for a market that is already there to listen to the needs of that community. 

As a software product manager, listening to community has its drawbacks because you can't please everybody all the time. Also, development time is costly so you have to move slow and cautiously or you will have reliability issues later on both in the code and in the user experience. If I had been the CEO of Serif, I wouldn't even have had this community. I would've had a private support portal where I could pick and choose which input is truly valuable and disregard a significant number by the wayside in order to manage expectations and communicate with customers via email about plans as a means to keep them engaged. Yes I feel that strongly about community driven feedback, sue me. I prefer efficient software development and to achieve that its best to have customers at arms length, in the waiting room, or on the line outside the store. (okay I'm just saying this because of iPhone's release)

55 minutes ago, wonderings said:

Serif definitely has their own way of doing things and I have no issue with it despite finding some simple things difficult to do (just a learning curve for new software when used to Adobe). I think Affinities colour panels are atrocious and overly complex, but they do the job and others will have no issue with it I am sure. As long as the job can get done and you can accomplish what needs to be done everything else can be learned. The important thing is to be able to capable of what needs done in the application. 

I kind of agree with you. Personally I can't stand the gradient panel. I can't copy an end point. It's not intelligent enough to allow me to delete an end or starting point if an additional node already exists on the gradient line which would shift it to be the new start or end point I deleted. I have to unnecessarily manage color swatches I don't want to keep.

Share this post


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

As a software product manager, listening to community has its drawbacks because you can't please everybody all the time. Also, development time is costly so you have to move slow and cautiously or you will have reliability issues later on both in the code and in the user experience. If I had been the CEO of Serif, I wouldn't even have had this community. I would've had a private support portal where I could pick and choose which input is truly valuable and disregard a significant number by the wayside in order to manage expectations and communicate with customers via email about plans as a means to keep them engaged. Yes I feel that strongly about community driven feedback, sue me. I prefer efficient software development and to achieve that its best to have customers at arms length, in the waiting room, or on the line outside the store. (okay I'm just saying this because of iPhone's release)

I kind of agree with you. Personally I can't stand the gradient panel. I can't copy an end or starting point. It's not intelligent enough to allow me to delete an end or starting point if an additional node already exists on the gradient line. I have to unnecessarily manage color swatches I don't want to keep.

Adobe does the private community with beta releases. I know I participated in one for a release of Indesign. They listened and implanted changes as the small community requested. I found it to be a very positive experience. Maybe that could be implemented here, have both a wider use base finding bugs and issues but start a secondary filled with people who are in the market they are after, be it pros or hobbyists. 

You certainly cannot please everyone but you can definitely listen and see what professionals need in the software. Many of the things asked for are not just personal preference but tools needed to work professionally. It is asked by professionals who are looking for options in this marketplace as Adobe is king and currently has us all with a gun to our head (I still love the software but hate the subscription). 

Share this post


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

Adobe does the private community with beta releases. I know I participated in one for a release of Indesign. They listened and implanted changes as the small community requested. I found it to be a very positive experience. Maybe that could be implemented here, have both a wider use base finding bugs and issues but start a secondary filled with people who are in the market they are after, be it pros or hobbyists. 

You certainly cannot please everyone but you can definitely listen and see what professionals need in the software. Many of the things asked for are not just personal preference but tools needed to work professionally. It is asked by professionals who are looking for options in this marketplace as Adobe is king and currently has us all with a gun to our head (I still love the software but hate the subscription). 

Yeah I mean there are positives too with having a community. Such as accountability to the community keeps developers in check. However if you have strong leadership whose passionate and vision about the product, it can be very powerful. The other positive is you expose all the bugs publicly which makes it easier to find all the issues in the product. With design and layout tools such as the Affinity products, this is a very good thing to have. I'm just not personally a fan of it because I tend to think it spoils customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for pdf pass-through

this is essential, nothing more to say!

a workaround is to place an eps instead of an pdf. Not a solution for everyone and, of course, an additional step and worst of all, you need Acrobat or something similar. 


--

Regards

Torsten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, fde101 said:

I believe a PDF can be converted to a PostScript file on a Mac using an option in the context menu in the Finder?

 

Actually: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2360935

 

You are right!

 

I've been searching under "safe as..." and "export" but it is under "print..." > then the pdf dropdown menu > "safe as postscript..."

It is then a "postscript" file and text converted to curves.

The layers of an multi-page document are shown in APub are NOT representing single pages so it will be better to save the pages from the pdf separately as single files.


--

Regards

Torsten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In principle you can export to .ps from Preview by selecting format with option key down... but it seems to work rarely ("Can not export").

Is text truly converted to curves in .ps? If so, using .ps is a good workaround in Publisher as it seems to accept .ps files readily.

Share this post


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

In principle you can export to .ps from Preview by selecting format with option key down... but it seems to work rarely ("Can not export").

Is text truly converted to curves in .ps? If so, using .ps is a good workaround in Publisher as it seems to accept .ps files readily.

I don't get any Postscript options in that Mac app with or without holding down the option key, but I tried exporting a 4 page PDF from Preview via the Print > PDF > Save as Postscript method. That worked fine.

However, on opening the resulting .ps file in the newest Affinity Publisher beta for Mac (v.1.70.140) or the previous one, it was a mess. Everything came in as a single page, with every page's content layered on top of each other, & with every item as a masked curve object, including all the text converted to individual curves.

So, as workarounds go, this is not a viable one. :(


Affinity Photo 1.7.1 & Affinity Designer 1.7.1; macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM
Affinity Photo 1.7.0.135 & Affinity Designer 1.7.0.9 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iOS 12.3.1

Share this post


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

However, on opening the resulting .ps file in the newest Affinity Publisher beta for Mac (v.1.70.140) or the previous one, it was a mess. Everything came in as a single page, with every page's content layered on top of each other, & with every item as a masked curve object, including all the text converted to individual curves.

So, as workarounds go, this is not a viable one. :(

On the other hand, i don't see when it makes sense to place a multi-page document in a layout. Best would be to split the document in 1 pages documents before ps export, wouldn't it?

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

×