4 ms·

Hmm. How good are they with the "grunt work" stuff for professional print design? Color profiles, PDF export, scripts for text formatting, files loading a gigab

by nothis 7y ago

Hmm. How good are they with the "grunt work" stuff for professional print design? Color profiles, PDF export, scripts for text formatting, files loading a gigabyte worth of photos, etc? I'm desperately waiting for a proper Adobe replacement but they're sitting on that segment, not with flashy, new features but with a solid-as-hell base of tried and tested background functionality.

trynewideas 7y ago
Affinity convert on Windows here. Profile support is fine, compatible with ICC profiles, does soft proofing and black point compensation. You'd have to go into more depth about your use cases as I know Adobe let some wild stuff happen, but if you just need to use and embed profiles and soft proof, you can do that. Its PDF export is good, not great—again, Adobe allows for extreme granularity in PDF settings so I'd need to know specific use cases to advise. PDF import and placing PDF docs is surprisingly good, in some case shockingly so. If you're publishing books built from scratch in Affinity Publisher, there's nothing off the top of my head that I had to fundamentally change about my workflow in shipping 4-color books with layered artwork and columnar text with sidebars to prepress. If you're editing PDFs or converting from INDD, you can get away with a lot but you need to be careful since there are a few feature gaps (see the next paragraph in particular) that don't convert well or at all. What you'll miss the most falls under what I think you mean by "scripts for text formatting". Publisher doesn't do grep styles or anything similar enough to replace that. It's the biggest feature I miss regularly. You'll miss the level of automation complexity and droplets in Photo too if you use those regularly in Photoshop. I don't have any problems with large or complex layouts loading huge amounts of data for artwork, or massive text docs. What I get that I didn't have in Adobe, and especially InDesign: pretty much full access from any of the component apps to vector drawing tools, raster and vector brushes, and shape tools, all of which behave consistently across the suite. No more having to flip my brain from Illustrator's vector drawing to Photoshop's to InDesign's, they all just work with each other and the same way, copy and paste across each other without any fuss, edit within each other easily when necessary, etc. I miss some power features, especially around styles and Photo automation, but I've adapted, and I appreciate the hell out of how well-integrated the three apps are with each other in interface and functionality. The forums are a good place to ask about or research feature implementations and requests, especially https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature-requests-suggestions/ https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature...
- nothis 7y ago
  Thanks! I'm starting to warm up to the idea of actually giving this a try!
- greggman2 7y ago
  I use Affinity Designer all the time. I bought Affinity Photo but when I actually had to do real work a small nit made me go buy a Photoshop license. That nit was I had several hundreds PNG files I needed to edit. In PS I double click the PNG in the Finder/Explorer, the file opens in Photoshop, I edit, if I added layers I Ctrl/Cmd-Shift-E to collapse them then Cmd/Ctrl-S to save and it saves back to the .PNG. Affinity can only save to non Affinity file formats via "Export" which is brings up one or more serial dialogs and save as file selector. That minor difference was enough to make it worth it for me to pay Adobe $120 to save me from hours of tedium. I mean $120 is not "that" much money and so it was worth it for me to save me even a little frustration. Others have complained about this workflow issue to Affinity but I think so far it's fallen on deaf ears. I know it's a minor nit and few people will probably care but it's annoying enough for people used to being able to more quickly edit screenshot .PNGs and or .JPGs that I hope Affinity listens eventually. Because of that though I've never gotten used to Affinity Photo where as I'm pretty happy with Affinity Designer
  - trynewideas 7y ago
    Agreed, across the board it's the automation features that I miss the most. Macro recording is about all they offer, and while you can do some batch runs I haven't been able to replicate anything but some pretty simple actions. They seem to be focused on Photoshop plugin compatibility over other features at the moment, which is good for some specialized workflows, but I really want better automation in the whole suite. I'll at least say the lack of automation has finally pushed me to learn more about what I can do with the likes of imagemagick, but the feature-specific use cases like you bring up will be a gap until they fortify those automation features.

by nothis 7y ago

trynewideas 7y ago

Affinity convert on Windows here. Profile support is fine, compatible with ICC profiles, does soft proofing and black point compensation. You'd have to go into more depth about your use cases as I know Adobe let some wild stuff happen, but if you just need to use and embed profiles and soft proof, you can do that. Its PDF export is good, not great—again, Adobe allows for extreme granularity in PDF settings so I'd need to know specific use cases to advise. PDF import and placing PDF docs is surprisingly good, in some case shockingly so. If you're publishing books built from scratch in Affinity Publisher, there's nothing off the top of my head that I had to fundamentally change about my workflow in shipping 4-color books with layered artwork and columnar text with sidebars to prepress. If you're editing PDFs or converting from INDD, you can get away with a lot but you need to be careful since there are a few feature gaps (see the next paragraph in particular) that don't convert well or at all. What you'll miss the most falls under what I think you mean by "scripts for text formatting". Publisher doesn't do grep styles or anything similar enough to replace that. It's the biggest feature I miss regularly. You'll miss the level of automation complexity and droplets in Photo too if you use those regularly in Photoshop. I don't have any problems with large or complex layouts loading huge amounts of data for artwork, or massive text docs. What I get that I didn't have in Adobe, and especially InDesign: pretty much full access from any of the component apps to vector drawing tools, raster and vector brushes, and shape tools, all of which behave consistently across the suite. No more having to flip my brain from Illustrator's vector drawing to Photoshop's to InDesign's, they all just work with each other and the same way, copy and paste across each other without any fuss, edit within each other easily when necessary, etc. I miss some power features, especially around styles and Photo automation, but I've adapted, and I appreciate the hell out of how well-integrated the three apps are with each other in interface and functionality. The forums are a good place to ask about or research feature implementations and requests, especially https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature-requests-suggestions/ https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature...

nothis 7y ago
Thanks! I'm starting to warm up to the idea of actually giving this a try!
greggman2 7y ago
I use Affinity Designer all the time. I bought Affinity Photo but when I actually had to do real work a small nit made me go buy a Photoshop license. That nit was I had several hundreds PNG files I needed to edit. In PS I double click the PNG in the Finder/Explorer, the file opens in Photoshop, I edit, if I added layers I Ctrl/Cmd-Shift-E to collapse them then Cmd/Ctrl-S to save and it saves back to the .PNG. Affinity can only save to non Affinity file formats via "Export" which is brings up one or more serial dialogs and save as file selector. That minor difference was enough to make it worth it for me to pay Adobe $120 to save me from hours of tedium. I mean $120 is not "that" much money and so it was worth it for me to save me even a little frustration. Others have complained about this workflow issue to Affinity but I think so far it's fallen on deaf ears. I know it's a minor nit and few people will probably care but it's annoying enough for people used to being able to more quickly edit screenshot .PNGs and or .JPGs that I hope Affinity listens eventually. Because of that though I've never gotten used to Affinity Photo where as I'm pretty happy with Affinity Designer
- trynewideas 7y ago
  Agreed, across the board it's the automation features that I miss the most. Macro recording is about all they offer, and while you can do some batch runs I haven't been able to replicate anything but some pretty simple actions. They seem to be focused on Photoshop plugin compatibility over other features at the moment, which is good for some specialized workflows, but I really want better automation in the whole suite. I'll at least say the lack of automation has finally pushed me to learn more about what I can do with the likes of imagemagick, but the feature-specific use cases like you bring up will be a gap until they fortify those automation features.