Show element frames

[walt.farrell]

Why are you clicking on the image in the layer panel, rather than clicking on the image itself on the screen?

[Old Bruce]

17 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Why are you clicking on the image in the layer panel, rather than clicking on the image itself on the screen?

I have to ask the same question.

[Medical Officer Bones]

19 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Why are you clicking on the image in the layer panel, rather than clicking on the image itself on the screen?

Because double-clicking it would be an invisible action in the screen recording? It does the same thing.

Single-click: select picture frame. Double-click: select contents of the picture frame. Same behaviour as InDesign. What IS different is that the pictureframe has no visible bounding box. Other shapes used as picture frames neither do, making it very fuzzy and finicky to work with.

In this case a visible bounding box is kinda a necessary ingredient for a smooth workflow.

[Medical Officer Bones]

Btw, a secondary issue is that the picture frame hides the cropped content while dragging the image. That is very problematic under circumstances: suppose I'd be importing a set of architectural drawings/views that are laid out on the same canvas in various spots. I need to re-arrange these views in my Publisher document, and therefore import the same file multiple times in my document to crop each view independently.

Now, here we discover that when the content is scaled and moved around, the picture frames obscure the rest of the drawings, making it incredibly inconvenient to place and crop these properly. That is not the case with InDesign: dragging and repositioning a picture frame's content displays a semi-transparent version of the cropped content, and cropping a set of drawing is easy-peasy.

Now, that is, unless I am completely dense, and I have missed an obvious setting or option in Publisher.

[prophet]

This is an old topic, but I haven't found any others asking this question. I have several different types of elements on my page, but in the normal, non-preview view, the only elements with visible frames are the text frames. As mentioned, transparent or white filled shapes are very difficult to find, and it would be nice to see the actual bounds of transparent/masked images.

[walt.farrell]

3 hours ago, prophet said:

This is an old topic, but I haven't found any others asking this question. I have several different types of elements on my page, but in the normal, non-preview view, the only elements with visible frames are the text frames. As mentioned, transparent or white filled shapes are very difficult to find, and it would be nice to see the actual bounds of transparent/masked images.

Is it enough to simply select all the layers in the Layers panel? (Click the top layer, shift+click the bottom one.)

[prophet]

5 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Is it enough to simply select all the layers in the Layers panel? (Click the top layer, shift+click the bottom one.)

That would work to answer the simple question of "where did I put that white box?", and I can achieve the same a bit faster with "Select All" key command. But as soon as I select an element, all other frames are gone again. Not a deal breaker, but seems like an "Show/Hide Frame Edges" command could be handy for some.

[wlk]

This is the an older one, but since the 1.9.1 is out,  just a bit of my view.

The straigth visibility of EVERY object on the page should be the essential and a basic feature of any layout/publishing software. The reason is obvious - you need an absolute control of everything on the page to end up with correct and reliable output.

The question of this topic has been answered in a first 4 posts - it is not possible (yet).
And I have to agree with guys above, the rest are just helping  workarounds (and excuses), which are working only partially, but mainly - slow down the workflow significantly.

It is not just about creating "empty" or "white" boxes and "why would you need them" (really??). They could be whatever - leftovers from previous designs, versions or while working on a design. That just happens! People do make mistakes and we all work under heavy time pressure, so having a objects on page you can't see is a straight way to hell. Because they allways affect other object on the page. Transparency is a "nice" addition to this. You need to know what are you doing, with what, and where it is.

I believe everyone here is on a tight deadlines, so the most important things in our everyday jobs are efficiency, usability and speed, and so is eliminating every possible errors. And this is the right opposite.

 

On 10/30/2018 at 2:33 PM, Michail said:

The search effort for such elements in the Layers panel is not very large, because the displayed layers always refer to the current page. 

You just can't be serious here. Could work for something simple, yes. But right now I have some sort of catalogue in front of me, with more than cca 300 objects on the page - "data merge" driven tables, pictures, lines, small vector shapes + dimensions.. etc. (yes I'm in InDesign). Half of them are in white - texts and lines on a colored background and pics. Changing something on back (upon client request) could lead (and it does) to a massive ammount of invisible objects on a (white) page. There is no way to handle them because I can't see them. Trying to locate them in the layer panel, Ctrl/Cmd + A, delete them all and start over, create temporary colored box under? Switch to Designer? There's no time to play games here.... 

 

On 10/30/2018 at 10:56 PM, walt.farrell said:

I'm curious about that, probably due to my lack of experience. Why are you usually creating shapes (rectangles, circles, etc.) without stroke or fill? What use are they when they're invisible?

Many uses for them. They  are here to help you, not to be printed (or visible in final design).

Depends what are you working on. It can be done in different ways but speed and efficiency is the key.
Maybe for creating an independent (and/or weird) text wrap objects - draw a shape, set text wrap, lock it and forget - then just run text box over. Or the opposite - having a clear space around the object - draw a mad or exact shape you need around, group it and move around freely and it will keep the area around clear. Or as a little complicated spacer - draw a shape and lay and snap the other objects around. Or a simple spacer to help you arrange objects. Or when constructing and applying crazy layouts - even with sophisticated guides, grids and measures you can't do everything. Just draw a few boxes and shapes representing the layout and snap objects to them. Then pull some guides and delete them or keep them to copy and paste to transfer layout across different documents. Or sometimes we put empty or white boxes on the page, so in the workflow sw is not ignoring and skipping empty pages. ....

 

On 10/31/2018 at 2:10 PM, fde101 said:

On 10/31/2018 at 2:04 PM, Michail said:

bad example

It's an even worse example considering that it is a text frame and you can turn on visible frames for those (Show Text Flow in the View menu).

No, that example is very accurate indeed. Also white filled objects are not visible. 

[fde101]

7 hours ago, wlk said:

Also white filled objects are not visible. 

They are if they are opaque and you layer them over top of something dark.

[wlk]

Sure they are visible on top of something dark, not sure what you mean.

We are talking about the frame edges of "white filled" objects (that are not on colored backgound) and "no stroke/no fill" objects are not visible, so you don't know where they are on the page and/or where they end. And that inevitably lead to  a faulty output illustrated in that example. And the other example posted by Medical Officer Bones. 

[LeG]

hello all,

so, I'm guessing, there is no news on this?

is this at least on the internal feature request list @MEB?

as pointed out before, this would be a very helpful feature.

 

thanks

[loukash]

On 3/2/2021 at 8:27 AM, wlk said:

frame edges of "white filled" objects (that are not on colored backgound) and "no stroke/no fill" objects are not visible, so you don't know where they are on the page and/or where they end.

Two workflows (as opposed to, er, "workarounds" or, ugh, "excuses") how to see them with a few clicks or keyboard shortcuts, whichever you prefer:

#1

1. Node tool
2. Select All
3. optional:
   switch to Color Picker tool to keep the bounding boxes visible without accidentally selecting or moving anything
   switch to Move tool and click the bounding boxes of objects you want to edit

#2

1. File > Document Setup > Color > Transparent Background: ON
2. there are your white fill objects!
3. workflow #1 (the transparent rest)

[wlk]

Thanks for the tips loukash,
but I'm afraid option #1 has been discussed a few times here in the posts above, and not recognised as a solution.

The problem is obvious - select all shows the objects, but when you select one, others disappear. 

I would call #1 as a "temporary location preview". Or a mind game like: select all, choose one, and remember where the other are. Bad guess? Try again - select all, choose one... and again. It's more of a "loop" or "going round in circles" than a workaround and definitely not a workflow. Really not. It's about editing, arranging, moving, scaling, not previewing.

#2 Could be workaround, I do that sometimes. 
But we can agree that it really does not go well with the readability or the design itself and the small object also coud be lost. Turning it on and off again is not a workflow.

[loukash]

2 hours ago, wlk said:

option #1 has been discussed a few times here in the posts above, and not recognised as a solution

Meh. If griping makes y'all feel better, then more power to you…
I'm fine with this, er, "solution".

Not that I'd think everything in that regard is just fine'n'dandy, however:

 

[loukash]

Another solution:
Sorry: "solution"

1. switch to the Designer persona
2. View > View Mode > Outline
3. voilà

[wlk]

On 4/29/2021 at 12:14 PM, loukash said:

Meh. If griping makes y'all feel better, then more power to you…
I'm fine with this, er, "solution".

If you're fine with it and it works for you, that's great. For me, due to amount of objects - not a chance.

[wlk]

On 4/29/2021 at 12:17 PM, loukash said:

Another solution:
Sorry: "solution"

1. switch to the Designer persona
2. View > View Mode > Outline
3. voilà

Yeah, this is cool.

Getting closer. But not really there, considering linked content. And a  lot of linked content...  

 

[loukash]

26 minutes ago, wlk said:

considering linked content. And a  lot of linked content...

Make a plan how you organize your work before  you start to work.
That's an integral part of a designer's job.

[carl123]

2 minutes ago, loukash said:

Make a plan how you organize your work before  you start to work.
That's an integral part of a designer's job.

Actually, 90% of the time I just start playing around and see where a design takes me.

Planning is too boring if you have a creative mind that you just want to let loose to run amok. Just like my dog in the duck park 

[loukash]

17 minutes ago, carl123 said:

you just want to let loose to run amok

But then you shouldn't be bothered with a bunch of invisible objects in the first place. Those are then part of your amok. If they wouldn't exist, you'd never get where you are at the end of your run; you were elsewhere.

That's why I prefer doing my "let loose" illustrations on paper, using my beloved Jaxon oil pastels, a 2B or 3B clutch pencil, and a probably 50 years old halfround putty knife.
There are no "undos".

[wlk]

2 hours ago, loukash said:

Make a plan how you organize your work before  you start to work.
That's an integral part of a designer's job.

Not sure now, where are u going with this and how it is related to the topic...

And yes, of course it is! Thats when you choose if the content is linked or not. One change in source file reflects immediately on all instances through entire publication, that's the point right? 

Ok, now I see. Painting/drawing nice and lovely designs - yeah, who cares about invisible object. And why would we? All the tips'n'tricks and workarounds above do well. You can do a pretty magazine with lovely pictures, but that's only the half of the job.

The other half is doing a precise DTP, heavy content pages, where you can't afford even a smallest error, that's where are we now.. Hey, its a Publisher. A DTP software. Before planning and organising the work goes a decision part - is it even possible? 

 

2 hours ago, loukash said:

I prefer doing my "let loose" illustrations on paper

And I love the freedom of physical paper and ink

 

[loukash]

12 minutes ago, wlk said:

who cares about invisible object

Oh, I, for one, do!
How many times have I used Ill-frustrator's clean-up commands to find those orphan lone accidental-click nodes or blank text objects.

Interestingly, the latter two issues can't even happen in Affinity because all apps will simply ignore standalone nodes or artistic text frames without content and auto-delete them. Well done, Serif!

21 minutes ago, wlk said:

doing a precise DTP, heavy content pages, where you can't afford even a smallest error

Been there done that many times with Schmadobe, of course.
Even some print guys now hate me for my nitpickery.

But fair enough, I haven't done any complex layout jobs with Affinity yet. Based on reading this thread, I have simply checked out which workflows are necessary if I would run into these issues. Having thus been forewarned, I'm prepared to deal with them accordingly when they should arrive.

29 minutes ago, wlk said:

Before planning and organising the work goes a decision part - is it even possible? 

Fair point. I expect to still be using ID or AI (CS5), let alone Acrobat every now and then in the foreseeable future.

[tersmuse]

A year later, and still nothing has happened in Serif development. Sad. The missing display of frames with content is atrocious!