Publisher did not pass the test

[Petar Petrenko]

I found this link to PDF test on an Quark FB page:

https://pdf-aktuell.ch/pa/language/en/disastrous-pdf-x-4-compatibility-with-new-affinity-publisher/?fbclid=IwAR3RmRuzr2-OpoZe0z4PNKRlJ83mqilHNJjGgQ1kv-zVwUWbcHs_Vwpifns

[Fixx]

Now how many of those errors were in PDF output and how many in PDF import?

[Petar Petrenko]

A Quark user Catalin Furutna counted 98 errors.

I put this link for A-Team as a guide to make PDF export excelent.

[MikeW]

Petar, read my comments on the FB group.

There is already a post here about the GHENT Test failure.

Any application is going to fail the test that opens a pdf for editing. 

[Petar Petrenko]

2 hours ago, MikeW said:

Petar, read my comments on the FB group.

There is already a post here about the GHENT Test failure.

Any application is going to fail the test that opens a pdf for editing. 

Obviously, I didn't notice your FB comment. If so, I wouldn't start this thread. Sorry.
BTW, why any app is going to fail on this test? I just wonder.

[MikeW]

1 minute ago, Petar Petrenko said:

Obviously, I didn't notice your FB comment. If so, I wouldn't start this thread. Sorry.
BTW, why any app is going to fail on this test? I just wonder.

No worries, Petar!

Applications with pdf passtrough can/will fail the tests depending on a number of factors. Such as not properly passing through overprint, mishandling of transparency, not handling spot colors for 1-bit bitmap handing properly and other reasons.

Applications without pdf passthrough can/will fail the tests depending on whether those types of things are properly imported and converted to native objects with those attributes. As far as I know no application can properly do this for all objects in the test suite...at least none did so a few years ago when I last tried.

For as smart as that person who did the tests is (and he is) either he didn't understand that there is no pdf passthrough at this time in Affinity applications or failed to understand the importance of that fact with using the GHENT test suite in them. It is inevitable Affinity applications were going to fail.  

[Petar Petrenko]

43 minutes ago, MikeW said:

For as smart as that person who did the tests is (and he is) either he didn't understand that there is no pdf passthrough at this time in Affinity applications or failed to understand the importance of that fact with using the GHENT test suite in them. It is inevitable Affinity applications were going to fail.  

That person is Catalina Furutuna (as I mentioned before) and you just commented on her post about the Ghent test.

[MikeW]

Catalin didn't do the testing. She only linked to the website that carried out the test as you did.

So she wasn't the person I was referring to 

Catalin is a smart person though.

[tobsen]

I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean: affinity should reach the goal of 0 errors. But some of those 98 errors might be easy to fix, other might be very important. So it's still valuable feedback.

I don't agree with "any application will fail that test" … You simply didn't get the purpose of it. 

Affinity should take that suite and try their best to make as less errors as possible. and: some of those problems might fall out of the 80/20 rule … I'm sure affinity is able to identify the important issues AND the low hanging fruits as well!

[MikeW]

15 minutes ago, tobsen said:

I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean: affinity should reach the goal of 0 errors. But some of those 98 errors might be easy to fix, other might be very important. So it's still valuable feedback.

I don't agree with "any application will fail that test" … You simply didn't get the purpose of it. 

Affinity should take that suite and try their best to make as less errors as possible. and: some of those problems might fall out of the 80/20 rule … I'm sure affinity is able to identify the important issues AND the low hanging fruits as well!

The goal of 100% passing the GHENT Test Suite is not only desirable it should happen. But it cannot happen until pdf passthrough is available and may not be 100% possible using the pdf library Serif uses...Serif wasn't able to do so using an older version of the same library in the Plus line anyway.

I fully understand the various GHENT tests. 

As regards the "any application will fail" comment, that was in relation to any application that is opening a GHENT test pdf for editing. They will always fail some aspects of the tests. Show me one application that opens one of the test pdfs for editing that doesn't fail. It's been a few years since I tried in in many applications, but at that time, they all failed.

[Stephan Jaeggi]

23 minutes ago, MikeW said:

As regards the "any application will fail" comment, that was in relation to any application that is opening a GHENT test pdf for editing. They will always fail some aspects of the tests. Show me one application that opens one of the test pdfs for editing that doesn't fail. It's been a few years since I tried in in many applications, but at that time, they all failed.

Last year the Ghent Workgroup started a certification program for their vendor members who are able to process the Ghent PDF Output Suite 5 without errors:
https://www.gwg.org/ghent-pdf-output-suite-5-compliancy/

Recently the first PDF editing application has received the compliancy label: Esko ArtPro+ 18.1

Stephan Jaeggi
Co-chair Process Control Subcommittee, Ghent Workgroup
Publisher PDF-AKTUELL: https://pdf-aktuell.ch/pa/language/en/posts/

[MikeW]

22 minutes ago, Stephan Jaeggi said:

Last year the Ghent Workgroup started a certification program for their vendor members who are able to process the Ghent PDF Output Suite 5 without errors:
https://www.gwg.org/ghent-pdf-output-suite-5-compliancy/

Recently the first PDF editing application has received the compliancy label: Esko ArtPro+ 18.1

Stephan Jaeggi
Co-chair Process Control Subcommittee, Ghent Workgroup
Publisher PDF-AKTUELL: https://pdf-aktuell.ch/pa/language/en/posts/

Thank you for jumping in, Stephan.

So I stand corrected. I'll still stand by the statement and in the future qualify the statement by writing desktop versus pre-press software...

Mike

[Alfred]

1 hour ago, MikeW said:

So I stand corrected. I'll still stand by the statement and in the future qualify the statement by writing desktop versus pre-press software...

Alternatively, Mike, you could include a phrase such as “generally affordable”. Esko ArtPro+ costs, at a minimum, an eye-watering 3650 EUR. That’s per year, per user.

[lacerto]

(...)

[MikeW]

1 minute ago, Lagarto said:

I am not sure if I got it right...but is there any specific reason the pdfs cannot be imported just as linked files? 

Because Serif has not yet implemented pdf passthrough at this time. This capability will come in a future version.

[Alfred]

8 minutes ago, MikeW said:

Because Serif has not yet implemented pdf passthrough at this time. This capability will come in a future version.

As mentioned elsewhere, that won’t happen until the Affinity apps interpret embedded fonts so that they can preserve the correct appearance of the ‘passthrough’ PDF.

[MikeW]

11 minutes ago, Alfred said:

As mentioned elsewhere, that won’t happen until the Affinity apps interpret embedded fonts so that they can preserve the correct appearance of the ‘passthrough’ PDF.

Chicken or egg?

When pdf passthrough comes, interpreting fonts will be part of that process. And I suspect so will the option of converting embedded fonts as curves.

[Alfred]

58 minutes ago, MikeW said:

Chicken or egg?

A fair point, as usual, Mike! My comment was based on the fact that PagePlus could interpret embedded fonts in PDFs several versions before passthrough capability was added.

[Stephan Jaeggi]

23 hours ago, Alfred said:

Alternatively, Mike, you could include a phrase such as “generally affordable”. Esko ArtPro+ costs, at a minimum, an eye-watering 3650 EUR. That’s per year, per user.

Three years ago I did the same test with Viva Designer 9 (relatively cheap desktop software). I got a much better result:
https://pdf-aktuell.ch/pa/language/en/vivadesigner-9-multiple-pdf-export-options/

Adobe InDesign and QuarkXPress also only show a few problems.

 

Stephan Jaeggi
Co-chair Process Control Subcommittee, Ghent Workgroup
Publisher PDF-AKTUELL: https://pdf-aktuell.ch/pa/language/en/posts/

[MikeW]

18 minutes ago, Stephan Jaeggi said:

Three years ago I did the same test with Viva Designer 9 (relatively cheap desktop software). .. 

I also use Viva Designer...

But until such time Serif brings in pdf passthrough, is the report really valid?

At this point in time, should Apub be compared to the likes of AI, CorelDraw, etc when a pdf be opened for editing?

[lacerto]

(...)

[Tadhg]

On 7/17/2019 at 5:51 PM, Lagarto said:

It is good to see comparisons just to see what is missing or does not work properly. But as Affinity Publisher is a version 1.x product I am not too concerned about it not being yet in the same league with programs that have been around for over two decades, or having a major version number 9. Preflight checks are also often so strict that a typical print pdf produced e.g. from InDesign (without specifying a standard like X-4) causes a number of warnings which are irrelevant in most jobs (but there of course are jobs where similar warnings would cause problems and poor print quality).

So far I've not used Publisher for any print job but several print pdfs that I have initially exported from in InDesign and then opened in Publisher and exported as X-4 pdfs have passed through without warnings the preflight compliance check-routines for PDF/X-4 of Adobe Acrobat so things have been looking good (considering that there is this conversion process in between). These have been relatively simple jobs, however, and I can see how more complex jobs could cause issues.

It is a bit alarming to hear an advanced member saying Affinity is not in the same league as older software programs. 

[Alfred]

17 minutes ago, Tadhg said:

It is a bit alarming to hear an advanced member saying Affinity is not in the same league as older software programs. 

Why do you find it alarming that other forum members don’t regard APub as being in the same league as older, more mature, software? (The ‘Advanced Member’ label is merely a reflection of the user’s post count.)

[MikeW]

24 minutes ago, Alfred said:

(The ‘Advanced Member’ label is merely a reflection of the user’s post count.)

Or set to whatever the member wants it to be once post count (or points or ... gets high enough. Else I have obtained a dubious distinction.

[R C-R]

8 hours ago, MikeW said:

Else I have obtained a dubious distinction.

I for one am "advanced" enough that I do not need any training to perfect my innate talent for idiocy.