About black (>K) shadow with a picture in background

[BigStef]

Hi,

I have made a test with some text shadowed on a picture.

The shadow has to be in black only. That's how i parameted my shadow : Black (K) only -> "product" mode, and it work.

But as you will see, the picture is a bit altered where the shadow is overprinted (see screnshot). The first file joined is all colors shown, the second is CMY only (no black) just to see the altered picture.

Any logical reason ?

[thomaso]

You can avoid that (unlogical) knock-out (not overprinting) of Black if you use blend mode "Multiply" and export as PDF/X1a or X-3.
What is "product" mode?

[BigStef]

Hi Thomaso, thank you for your answer...

I had translated "Product" from the french term. I have just restarted Publisher in english and the term is actually "Multiply". So my shadow was correct.

I have tried export in PDF X1 or X3, even X4, but the image is still altered ... 

Just to make a test, i have cancelled shadow on the text, duplicated the text, filled it in black, added a Blur effect and 40% opacity in Multiply mode on the layer. SO it is a "kind of" shadow manually done. In that case, the image IS NOT altered. Funny isn't it ? :-) (See screenshot).

What I'm expecting is to have that with the shadow option (much more easy to use ;). Do you think it is possible ?

[thomaso]

Yes, a shadow with K only is still an issue in AfPub.

But it appears to work for me with X/1-a and X-3.
Though it is not overprinting, at least it doesn't change the content underneath:

v408_2 shadow X-1a.pdf

[BigStef]

Hi Thanks for sharing your test, great ! :-)

So I have done another test, then another one and then I noticed something weird : The altered background is only on the last item created with a shadow.

For example on my screenshot below, I simply duplicate the text block and the image block 3 times with exactly same shadow on text.

Exported on PDF (X-1a), only the last item has the background altered. SO I definitely consider this as a bug from Publisher, right ?

 

 

[thomaso]

No such "every last object" rule for me ,
I always get the same results depending on my settings only: Shadow in K-only needs multiply and PDF/X1a or X-3. – Here with K unselected:

Maybe my test .afpub will help for your tests:  v408 shadow 1-6.afpub   /   v408 shadow 1-6.pdf

p.s: "only the last item has ..." :: I got confused occasionally by the effects options window UI, needed to double check my settings because they don't get all visible on page but on export only. Especially black shadow color is tricky to detect because to assign the color one needs to open a pop-up color panel which in its swatches section makes it not quite easy to distinguish similar swatches because of their fixed tiny size, the missing global and spot markers and the lack of names ...

 

[Old Bruce]

I don't think you can use 100% K as a shadow colour. Think about what is happening here with regards to the shadow on the Orange rectangle.

For the Normal blend there is a dark orange colour calculated there, not a 100% K colour being added. When you remove the K then there is the calculated lighter orange colour left. 

For the multiply the K is not present due to no shadow is there without black ink.

[MikeW]

6 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

I don't think you can use 100% K as a shadow colour. Think about what is happening here with regards to the shadow on the Orange rectangle.

For the Normal blend there is a dark orange colour calculated there, not a 100% K colour being added. When you remove the K then there is the calculated lighter orange colour left. 

For the multiply the K is not present due to no shadow is there without black ink.

One can use 100% k in say QXP, ID, etc. Did I misunderstand?

[thomaso]

Old Bruce, it's okay. I am aware of all what you said but it doesn't change things. A K-only shadow does work under 2 conditions: 1.) Multiply and 2.) PDF/X-1a or -3.
Yes, in my last shadow screenshot above the black and the shadow is missing because it was unchecked in Acrobat to show what happens underneath.

[Old Bruce]

1 minute ago, MikeW said:

One can use 100% k in say QXP, ID, etc. Did I misunderstand?

He is removing the K channel in the cmyk and is wondering about the different results.

[thomaso]

Just now, Old Bruce said:

is wondering about the different results.

No, not at all. What makes you think so?

[BigStef]

7 minutes ago, MikeW said:

One can use 100% k in say QXP, ID, etc. Did I misunderstand?

Yeah Mike, in indesign, I always used à K shadow at 40% ou 50% "Multiply" and the balack was just added to the background...

14 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

I don't think you can use 100% K as a shadow colour. 

For the Normal blend there is a dark orange colour calculated there, not a 100% K colour being added. When you remove the K then there is the calculated lighter orange colour left. 

For the multiply the K is not present due to no shadow is there without black ink.

I do not agree Old Bruce. The black shadow should just be "added" to the background. As I said above, Shadow in Indesign work that way ...

Plus, how do you then explain that in my case, only the last object created has the background altered ? That's no sense and so... a bug, right ?

[thomaso]

8 minutes ago, BigStef said:

"Multiply" and the balack was just added to the background... 

Works the same in AfPub, but there it "just" needs specific (old) PDF version for export. <– THAT is the bug.

12 minutes ago, BigStef said:

only the last object created has the background altered ?

I assume different settings for "the last". – Can you upload your document?

[BigStef]

Yeah Thomaso, here it is...

test ombre.afpub

I just duplicated the items... So I don't understand how the setting could be different. If you duplicate the last one, then the new duplicated item will have backgground latered and the previous will be OK; Weird, ins't it ?

[thomaso]

@ BigStef, you have assigned 4-c black for all three objects:

Since the image wasn't embedded I placed a rectangle. As PDF/X-3 it looks like this with K set to off:

 

[BigStef]

Mh... This is not what I have here... A black 100% shadow a no other color (look screenshot, same file i sent you) :

But I really appreciate your tenacity on this case haha :)

[thomaso]

Hm. – How do you see my shadow black definitions in my .afpub?

"tenacity"?  (had to look up in the dictionary) I'd rather say I try to prevent to get mad by AfPublisher's insane color & swatches handling: with K-only shadows it seems one needs to save a swatch in an extra document palette to make sure for that specific K-only to get moved with the document. How sick!

So, create a document palette, then there a 100 K swatch and assign that to your 3 objects and send it again.
Or compare my .afpub + screenshots with your view on and export from it ...

[thomaso]

and, BigStef, please use a font which I will have for sure.  "Helvetica Neue LT Std" might be a bit unnecessary complex by its name alone to be compatible , or convert it to curves. – or simply just one shape shall show a shadow sure.

[thomaso]

2 hours ago, BigStef said:

I just duplicated the items... So I don't understand how the setting could be different. If you duplicate the last one, then the new duplicated item will have backgground latered and the previous will be OK; Weird, ins't it ? 

Do you get any change – either with copies or any "last object" – on page view within AfPub already – or only after export in a PDF?

I can't see that change here if I copy your last object in your .afpub twice, neither within AfPub nor in this PDF:

test ombre _ot & copied last object twice.pdf

 

But I see that the shadow appears brighter from top to bottom per object.
That reminds me to an issue with k-only that ended up in a bug with different color spaces/ color profiles between an .afpub and a placed .afdesign resource.

 

 

[Patrick Connor]

Sorry.

Thank you for reporting a problem using 1.7.x . It appears that a member of the Affinity QA team didn't get round to fully investigating this specific report posted in the bugs forums. We are very sorry for this oversight. Yours is one of a number of reports that I am posting this apology to, using an automated script.

Now we have released 1.8.3 on all platforms containing many hundreds of bug fixes, and we hope your problem has already been fully addressed. If you still have this problem in the 1.8.3 release build, then the QA team would really appreciate you reporting again it in the relevant Bugs forum.

• Report a Bug in Affinity Designer
• Report a Bug in Affinity Photo
• Report a Bug in Affinity Publisher

Each of those links above contains instructions how best to report a bug to us. If that is what you already did in this thread just copy paste your original report into a new thread. We appreciate all the information that you have including sample files and screen shots to help us replicate your problem.

This thread has now been locked as the QA team are not following the threads to which this automatic reply is made, which is why we would appreciate a new bug report if you are still have this problem in the current 1.8.3 release build.