MacInTouch Amazon link...
Channels
Products



I just went to mess with a photo on my phone, because I’m not in front of my computer. I decided to use Adobe Photoshop Fix, which I’ve used in the past a few times. It now appears that it will automatically sync photos via Creative Cloud. I don’t want to use Creative Cloud’s cloud features, so I went to turn it off in preferences, and lo and behold, there was the preference but it was kid-proof. There is absolutely no way to turn it on or off, it just was.

I have really come to detest Adobe as a company. I am with them now because I have been using and teaching Photoshop for 25 years, but I will not be with them forever. Their arrogance makes most other companies look humble.
 


I just went to mess with a photo on my phone
Love or hate Google, its free Snapseed photo editor is powerful, friendly, and easy. I use it on iPad and my Android LG G8.

Best I can tell, Snapseed isn't intrusively sending photo data up to Google, but that's more an observation about the Android version than iOS.

Snapseed was built on the Nik software Google bought, milked, then sold on to DxO.
 


I just went to mess with a photo on my phone, because I’m not in front of my computer. I decided to use Adobe Photoshop Fix, which I’ve used in the past a few times. It now appears that it will automatically sync photos via Creative Cloud. I don’t want to use Creative Cloud’s cloud features, so I went to turn it off in preferences, and lo and behold, there was the preference but it was kid-proof. There is absolutely no way to turn it on or off, it just was.
I have really come to detest Adobe as a company. I am with them now because I have been using and teaching Photoshop for 25 years, but I will not be with them forever. Their arrogance makes most other companies look humble.
Photoshop Fix is a mobile application. It is Adobe's assumption that users are going to want files edited by Fix to be synced to the desktop. If you disagree, your viewpoint is perfectly valid; just don't use Adobe mobile applications. I don't use Fix, but I like Lightroom Mobile and the nascent Photoshop Mobile on my iPad Pro because of their ability to sync back to my desktop Macs. I'm not yet ready for an all-mobile solution; Lightroom Classic on my iMac is my hub, everything else is an extension.

As for detesting Adobe, that word is a bit strong for me. I find much to dislike about Adobe, in particular the arrogance that you cited. That includes their refusal to name the various Photoshop and Lightroom applications in a coherent and easily-understood way.
 



Ric Ford

MacInTouch
And did you all notice that Markzware now has an InDesign-to-Affinity Publisher convertor available? Works great.
Are you talking about IDMarkz? Here's a user guide:

https://cdn.manula.com/user/15337/19141_21067_en_1568150775.pdf?v=20191125124339

Here's a video tutorial:

Open in Affinity Publisher

(It seems a bit ironic for the converter to cost at least 4x what Affinity Publisher costs...
Oh, but hey, there's apparently a 50% off promotion through tomorrow (Dec. 5) only, via promo code IDMarkzLaunch.)
 


Are you talking about IDMarkz? Here's a user guide:

https://cdn.manula.com/user/15337/19141_21067_en_1568150775.pdf?v=20191125124339

Here's a video tutorial:

Open in Affinity Publisher

(It seems a bit ironic for the converter to cost at least 4x what Affinity Publisher costs...
Oh, but hey, there's apparently a 50% off promotion through tomorrow (Dec. 5) only, via promo code IDMarkzLaunch.)
What am I missing here? Publisher opens PDFs. InDesign exports PDFs. Bingo, and its doesn't cost anything extra.
 


Re an Adobe InDesign -> Affinity Publisher convertor costing 4x the price of the Affinity app alone, ever the cynic, I have to say [that it's] probably worth it for a good-sized graphics house or successful designer to have, but it won't reach down to my level anytime soon at that $200 price point. As in never.

For one thing, Serif is really reluctant to release its inner workings of proprietary file commonality across all three of its graphic programs, and that is understandable for all the years of effort developing the system. Thorston Lemke over at GraphicConverter has said he's not able to get Serif to open up the format for conversion (yet). But an InDesign to Publisher convertor is extremely desirable. Converting ID docs to an intermediate PDF file to open in Publisher is a less than ideal compromise. There were no other alternatives until now. (I'm still dealing with converting my old QuarkXpress 3.3 -4.11 docs to more modern files. Thank the gods that shareware LibreOffice opens old Claris/ Appleworks docs pretty faithfully.)...
 


What am I missing here? Publisher opens PDFs. InDesign exports PDFs. Bingo, and its doesn't cost anything extra.
I haven't played with the IDMarkz convertor yet, but I would assume that if you have complicated templates for brochures, newsletters and so on, that your structures (threads and so on) won't survive an export to a PDF and import to Publisher.
 


(It seems a bit ironic for the converter to cost at least 4x what Affinity Publisher costs...
Oh, but hey, there's apparently a 50% off promotion through tomorrow (Dec. 5) only, via promo code IDMarkzLaunch.)
From a value perspective, it makes a lot of sense (provided you don't set value based on time used rather than time saved).

At their heart, conversion products only do one thing, and often the 'trip' is entirely one way. Yet they provide an extraordinary value by enabling you to not have to recreate your work.

Consider a conversion that takes a minute or two. Then you open up the newly converted file, and it is almost immediately usable. Calculate the amount of time it would take to recreate the file by hand. Let's say a few hours. The converter just 'gave' several hours you can do something else.

I honestly think any product should be evaluated based on import / export capabilities. I have a colleague who makes a database conversion product that sells to the Filemaker market, and he sells a lot of licenses because some portions of Filemaker files are stored in a proprietary, binary format that 'locks in' your work. Or you have other products that only let you export in a format that dramatically reduces the usability of what you are exporting. It is an unfortunate but predictable practice among many tech companies that the more they lock you in and maximize their market share, the more they can change their business models on a whim without fear of losing your business.

And, yeah, I love the new Affinity products, too.
 


Are you talking about IDMarkz

(It seems a bit ironic for the converter to cost at least 4x what Affinity Publisher costs...
Oh, but hey, there's apparently a 50% off promotion through tomorrow (Dec. 5) only, via promo code IDMarkzLaunch.)
I tried the upgrade link for the perpetual version, but after success with recognizing my MarkzTools license, the resulting shopping cart page states
IDMarkz (1 Year Subscription) Mac - 1.01
Not sure I need a subscription...
 


Are you talking about IDMarkz? Here's a user guide:
Here's a video tutorial:
... there's apparently a 50% off promotion through tomorrow (Dec. 5) only, via promo code IDMarkzLaunch.)
I jumped on this sale immediately. Several reasons:

- MarkzWare has been around a long time and makes quality software.​
- A dedicated export tool is likely better than Adobe's export offering, and the direct-to-Affinity Publisher option is very attractive.​
- The app is offered for a one-time lifetime license fee or a cheaper annual subscription. I bought the perpetual license for $99.50.​
 


When Publisher first arrived, I said it needed a translator to convert the masses from Adobe. At the time, I didn't realise just how good a job it did from PDF. The very first document I converted was a 110-page photo book with plenty of text (although not much by way of linked boxes). I was pretty staggered by just how good a job it did.

I don't think I'd be paying for a conversion plugin until I'd at least tried opening from a PDF. Serif have done a remarkable job creating Publisher files from PDF - I am genuinely impressed.
 


I tried the upgrade link for the perpetual version, but after success with recognizing my MarkzTools license, the resulting shopping cart page states
IDMarkz (1 Year Subscription) Mac - 1.01​
Not sure I need a subscription...
Just went to their website – 50% off the permanent license of $199.

Since I won’t ever upgrade InDesign again, I won’t need to upgrade the convertor.
So, for $100 I get permanent access to all my old indd files.
 


I just saw these posts about IDMarkz and was so excited, I immediately purchased a copy. (By the way, the 50% sale is still active at 12/6/19 2:00 EST.)

Unfortunately, I should have looked before I leaped. I'm definitely missing something regarding InDesign -> Affinity Publisher.

This does not convert layouts as I expected. It converts the InDesign file to a PDF, which is then opened in Affinity Publisher. It does not actually open or convert directly from InDesign to Afffinity, as stated on their product page.

If you have InDesign, you can create the PDF yourself and open that in Publisher. If you already have layouts in PDF format (as I do for all my INDD files, since that's what the printer gets), then you can get the same exact results by opening the PDF in Publisher.

I imagine if you have no access to InDesign, and a client sends you an InDesign file, this is better than nothing. It does have some nice preview features. But a conversion tool it is not.

PDF -> Publisher may work for some but produces unusable results for my layouts. I've requested a refund.
 


Mik

Me too! I jumped on the discount before seeing Joe’s post and have just requested a refund.

From their site: "export your InDesign document as IDML. PDF, TIFF, PNG, JPEG or GIF”.

Serif has been promising a Publisher IDML importer for some time, and it’s in the 1.8 beta. I haven’t tried it yet, but the beta support forum has several threads on IDML, and it looks promising.

(InDesign user since version 1)
 


This does not convert layouts as I expected. It converts the InDesign file to a PDF, which is then opened in Affinity Publisher. It does not actually open or convert directly from InDesign to Afffinity, as stated on their product page.
To their credit, Markzware responded quickly. They have provided me a pre-release of their upcoming version and asked me to try it with the Publisher 1.8 beta. Supposedly, that will take an INDD file and use that to send an IDML to Publisher.

Hopefully, that will work. I do believe they could have made the product description a little more clear. What Mik wrote is correct... further down the product page it states the export formats. However, I do not want to export. As the lead-in on the product page states, I want to "convert" and "open my InDesign files in" [Affinity Publisher].
 


To their credit, Markzware responded quickly. They have provided me a pre-release of their upcoming version and asked me to try it with the Publisher 1.8 beta. Supposedly, that will take an INDD file and use that to send an IDML to Publisher.

Hopefully, that will work. I do believe they could have made the product description a little more clear. What Mik wrote is correct... further down the product page it states the export formats. However, I do not want to export. As the lead-in on the product page states, I want to "convert" and "open my InDesign files in" [Affinity Publisher].
I'm a developer with Markzware, so I can clarify the issue. IDMarkz (the current version available) does export IDML, which can be opened in Affinity Publisher v1.8 (currently in beta) or greater.

IDMarkz also has an "Open in Publisher" feature, which automates the conversion and opening (just to simplify the process).

At the time of the IDMarkz release, Affinity hadn't released the v1.8 beta with the IDML import feature, so IDMarkz relied on the PDF importing of Publisher. We have since built a prerelease version that will export to IDML (rather than PDF) and open that in Publisher, if v1.8 or greater is installed.

The current release would also work, but rather than using the "Open in Publisher" feature, you would need to export the IDML then manually open that in Publisher v1.8 or greater.

We expect to have the prerelease out as a general release next week. But in the meantime, for anyone who might have purchased or intends to purchase, here is a link to the prerelease which doesn't require the work around. If you have any issues, please feel free to reach out to me.

 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
A little background info for what it's worth:
Adobe said:
Save documents in InDesign

Save an InDesign Markup (IDML) document

In some cases you may want to save an InDesign in interchange markup format. It’s especially useful to save in this format when you open a QuarkXPress or PageMaker publication in InDesign, when you open a document created in a previous version of InDesign, or when you’re experiencing problems with your document, such as not being able to delete color swatches.
  • Choose File > Save (CS6) or File > Export (CS5).
  • From the Save As Type (Windows) or Format (Mac OS) menu, choose InDesign Markup (IDML).
  • Click Save.
You can open the saved IDML file in InDesign CS5 and InDesign CS4 but not in any previous version of InDesign.
Adobe said:
Adobe InDesign Markup Language (IDML) Cookbook [PDF]

... IDML files represent complete InDesign documents. Because they are ZIP (or, more accurately, UCF) archives, they commonly are called packages. These packages contain a hierarchy of XML files representing various parts of the InDesign document. An equivalent XML representation is used in single-text-file (non-archive-based) InCopy story files, snippets, and assignments. These are not ZIP files but rather single XML files that contain all elements necessary to reconstruct a particular piece of content.
IDML was designed to facilitate the inspection and construction of InDesign content outside of InDesign....
 
  • appreciate
Reactions: Mik


I tried the upgrade link for the perpetual version, but after success with recognizing my MarkzTools license, the resulting shopping cart page states
Not sure I need a subscription...
I believe the problem is that the MarkzTools license you have is a subscription license, so it'll only let you upgrade to the subscription license of IDMarkz.

You can visit the IDMarkz product page to purchase a perpetual license directly; use coupon code IDMarkzLaunch to get the 50% discount (which I believe is cheaper than the upgrade would be anyway).

The IDMarkzLaunch promo has been extended through the end of the year (2019).
 


Mik

Thank you to Markzware for their prompt response and for the refund. The person I spoke to said a number of people had complained about the difference between the marketing language on their site and the reality.

Ric clarified that InDesign can already create an IDML file (that Publisher 1.8 can import). I’ll be testing that this weekend.

And of course InDesign can export a PDF file that Publisher can import. I’ve been learning about this method over the last few months, and have found much useful advice on the user forum.

I’m impressed with the Serif apps (and their support) and I’m enjoying my new tools.
 


Serif's Affinity discounts have been extended on the heels of an Apple award:
When buying from Affinity's website, do Americans get their credit card charged in USD from a UK company? I see prices shown in $. Or is there some fluctuating exchange rate magic done?
 


It seems a bit ironic for the converter to cost at least 4x what Affinity Publisher costs...
if I recall correctly, Markzware's product prices have remained fairly consistent over the decades, and have always been a good value for the cost where print design and production is a concern.

The outlier here is Serif and their Affinity product line. Given their feature sets and the praise they've received, Publisher and its companion apps could easily cost four times as much as they do, and still provide a better value than Adobe's offerings.
 


Thank you to Markzware for their prompt response and for the refund. The person I spoke to said a number of people had complained about the difference between the marketing language on their site and the reality.
I'll second that. Markzware was very prompt in issuing my refund. In our email exchange, they explained the shortcomings much better than the marketing language. They should really clarify things on the website.
Ric clarified that InDesign can already create an IDML file (that Publisher 1.8 can import). I’ll be testing that this weekend.
I just found the latest Publisher 1.8 beta and can confirm - it does import an InDesign IDML file. I didn't do much other than test the import function on a few files, but multi-page layouts with plenty of text and graphics looked very good in Publisher. Certainly better than the results from the original QXP -> INDD conversions.
And of course InDesign can export a PDF file that Publisher can import. I’ve been learning about this method over the last few months, and have found much useful advice on the user forum.
Yes, Publisher can import a PDF file. I would caution against relying on this method. I imported a single-page PDF of an ad with text and graphics. The Markzware app and just a straight import via Publisher produced the same, poor results. Text paragraphs were split into individual lines, graphics were cut off. I guess in a pinch, the function might be a good starting point to recreate a layout, but it would take a lot of work to make something usable from the layouts I tested.
I’m impressed with the Serif apps (and their support) and I’m enjoying my new tools.
100% - Serif is doing some amazing things. In my opinion, the upcoming IDML import is going to be a killer feature that makes some professional houses consider a switch.
 


The outlier here is Serif and their Affinity product line. Given their feature sets and the praise they've received, Publisher and its companion apps could easily cost four times as much as they do, and still provide a better value than Adobe's offerings.
As much as I love it, the incredibly low price for Serif products is the only thing that worries me. It will (and has) help them break into the market. It also has the potential to pick up business from freelancers and small operations that cannot justify Adobe's subscription price.

But what happens a few years down the road? Is the low price model sustainable? Adobe (and Quark before them) were built on an "enterprise" pricing model. Even with that, Adobe had to move to a subscription model to keep the investors happy.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
As much as I love it, the incredibly low price for Serif products is the only thing that worries me. It will (and has) help them break into the market. It also has the potential to pick up business from freelancers and small operations that cannot justify Adobe's subscription price. But what happens a few years down the road? Is the low price model sustainable? Adobe (and Quark before them) were built on an "enterprise" pricing model. Even with that, Adobe had to move to a subscription model to keep the investors happy.
Adobe and Serif are operating under radically different business models, and I think that it's possible for the smaller company to survive and prosper while charging lower prices for its products. (We have a some great examples in the Mac ecosystem, such as Bombich Software, ProVUE Development, Bare Bones, Thorsten Lemke, SoftRAID, and more.)

Adobe is spending billions upon billions of dollars a year as a public corporation, and I suspect that good software can be developed for a whole lot less. Serif is a far smaller, privately held company, employing about 200 people vs. an Adobe employee count of some 20,000.
 


As much as I love it, the incredibly low price for Serif products is the only thing that worries me. It will (and has) help them break into the market. It also has the potential to pick up business from freelancers and small operations that cannot justify Adobe's subscription price.

But what happens a few years down the road? Is the low price model sustainable? Adobe (and Quark before them) were built on an "enterprise" pricing model. Even with that, Adobe had to move to a subscription model to keep the investors happy.
As someone who has had feet in both the enterprise/corporate and the independent publishing worlds, I think you're spot on here, Joe.

Affinity is making some killer products that are fairly deep in terms of features, but they will need a bit more history in the market before many larger shops look at them as a true replacement for ID or QXP (and Photoshop and Illustrator). It's not impossible, and it isn't inconceivable; Affinity will need time to prove that they're in this for the long haul — and can adapt to the needs of larger organizations.

When I ran MacWEEK and Macworld, our production teams were 'locked down' into QXP; we were often at least a revision behind, both in the app and the OS, because printing was the critical point in our workflow. MW ultimately went to ID, after an extensive 'shadow' period with tests and retests and discussions with Adobe support people. While the print magazine world is much diminished these days, I can't see some larger organization moving to Affinity because they're cheaper and have a lot (not all) of the features found in the big guys' products.

I use ID today as a small publisher, and I've looked at Publisher with interest. It is a good, potentially great, product, but it still doesn't add anything that would significantly improve my workflow, which is my critical point.

Sure, I'm always happy to pay less $$, but for now, I pay the CC tax without too much hesitation. I use enough of the CC apps that I can justify the yearly expense (and find the odd discount sale from time to time). If I didn't have a small business, I would feel differently.

One of the cool things about the overall reaction to Adobe's subscription services is that the world of creative apps is so much deeper today than it was five years ago. It's refreshing that a company like Affinity can come out of nowhere and have a suite of creative apps that come close to ID, Illustrator, and Photoshop. And the image-editing world is just as wide-open today as well. Five years ago, I was lamenting the fact to a friend that, if you didn't like Lightroom and Photoshop, you didn't have a lot of good options. Today, that's not the case. That, to me, is a good thing for the market, and for us as users of all types.
 


Amazon disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Latest posts