I don't work in InDesign often. I had created a template file for a book back in December of 2011 (originally created in CS3). I opened this file in CS6 today and did a Save As. Now it's time to edit a few things to customize it for this new book. So, I went into the Master Pages to tweak some things. But, I can't edit any text. I can click on some photos (not all), but no text is selectable or editable. What in the world has happened to my file?
I also went back to the final files for the book I did in December (not the template file, the actual working files). Those give me the same behavior. Text that should have been editable is not even selectable. Again, some photos can be selected and moved, etc. but no text/text boxes.
Is there some conversion that takes place opening a CS3 file in CS6 that is causing this to happen? How do I fix it?
Open the layers panel and check to see if the text frames are locked. Locking behavior changed since CS3 and by default locked frames are no longer selectable, which reduces functionality on some older templates. If the frames are locked you can either unlock them or go to the preferences and change the setting to allow selection of locked frames.
Okay, so it turns out there's this new (to me) item under the Object menu to "Unlock All on Spread." If I select that, everything on the Master Page is then editable. So, I guess I have it working....somewhat.
From what I can recall when I created these templates in CS3, I could "lock" items that I didn't want to move, etc. but I could still select it and unlock it. This functionality seems to be gone. So, if I lock something, I have to go back and click "Unlock All on Spread." That unlocks EVERYTHING even if I only want one item unlocked. Is there something I'm missing that'll give me back some of that old functionality?
Some things I want to be locked both ont he master and reg page. Other things I want to be able to override on the page, so I select that option for each object. But I guess I'd see all objects on the Mater Page as at least selectable whether locked or not.
You can still unlock objects individually using either the layers panel (that's been updated, too), or by clicking the lock icon on the object itself (near the upper left corner).
That said, you will be happier if you cahng eyour preferences to allow selection of locked objects. This essentially restores the beahvior you are used to seeing -- position is locked but you can still select and put content into a frame.
Mmm, kinda. If you are working in View -> Screen Mode -> Normal and have View -> Extras -> Show Frame Edges on, then a little lock icon appears on each locked frame. Click on it once, and it unlocks. If you don't work with all of that stuff turned on, then I know of no way to unlock a single item on a page.
I see lock icons on some things and not others. I think it's because two of my text boxes are only a single line in height and there's no room for the lock icon to show up. So, some objects I can't unlock at all without unlocking EVERYTHING. Definitely a different and more inconvenient behavior than I'm used to. But, I guess I'll get used to it.
Okay, so I found the preference that lets me still select locked objects. Unfortunately there's still no "unlock" when I right-click. So, without the lock icon showing, there's no way to unlock some objects without unlocking everything else.
Joel Cherney wrote:
I knew that our posts would collide, Peter, and that I'd learn a new way to unlock a single item without having all of the invisible stuff turned on.
I'm actually partial to using the layers panel (it was a long-time request of mine to have it work like Illustrator) but was a bit shocked when the other behavior changed and had to lobby pretty hard to get that preference option added.
Well thanks for the lobbying for that option
I have NOTHING on layers. So, it looks like at some point I'll need to go back and do that. Right now it's all on one layer. Layers make a lot of sense though. I use layers like a mad man in Photoshop! :-D
I have NOTHING on layers.
Well, of course you do. It's just that you don't have things on MULTIPLE layers, but there's no requirement other than your own sense of organization to use more than one layer.
Now, though, that you can actually see all the objects and work them on the layers panel you might want to spend more time there. It's a HUGE improvement over CS3.
And in CS3 there would not have been much reason to ever open the layers panel unless you needed to use more than one. It wouldn't show you the individual obejcts or allow you to work with them in the panel. Now you can.
Just upgraded from CS2 to CS6 and now struggling to edit text on Master Page, and would like to know how to set the preference mentioned here ...
"That said, you will be happier if you cahng eyour preferences to allow selection of locked objects. This essentially restores the beahvior you are used to seeing -- position is locked but you can still select and put content into a frame."
Edit > Preferences > General... (Windows) or InDesign > Preferences > General... (Mac), and uncheck the box to prevent selection of locked objects.
But are you really working on the master page, or are you having toruble overriding master obejcts?
Many thanks - both, but I think solved by the suggestion.
Another CS2 > CS6 query has arisen: When comparing the output PDFs (InDesign CS6 vs CS2), the comparison process is showing unwanted variations to the CS6 text layout that are confusing when trying to track my edited text changes, e.g., these CS6 variations are unwanted:
CS2 [Old text]: " "
CS6 [New text]: " [?993 ]"
CS2 [Old text]: "information/notices"
CS6 [New text]: "information /notices"
CS2 [Old text]: "- publishers"
CS6 [New text]: "-publishers"
Does anyone know what font setting would return the CS6 formatting to that in the original CS2 document ?
Are you converting directly from the the CS2 .indd file to CS6? I would suggest you export the files to .inx from CS2, then open those in CS6 instead.
There are significant changes to the text engine between CS2 and CS6 and you can expect changes to text flow (especially word spacing in justified text), though there should be no glyphs added, removed or changed. You won't see the new text engine kick in, though, until you touch a text frame, at which point the entire story will recompose, possibly making changes on another page, so you need to check carefully. Converting from .inx causes all stories to recompose using the new text engine when the file is opened.
Many thanks, again.
The ID CS2 version was simply opened by ID CS6 and saved in CS6 format.
Unfortunately CS2 has now been uninstalled (to avoid the risk of conflicts with CS6), and also the CS6 version document has been revised since.
CS2 ad CS6 can co-exist with no issues on the same machine. Each version is a separate application. What you cannot do is uninstall earlier versions AFTER you install new ones, and you may have problems if you try to reinstall an eerlier version after a new one, so if you want to put CS2 back (and I strongly recommend that you do), you should uninstall CS6, then reinstall both in chronological order.
Depends on the machine, Peter. That’s certainly not true on a newer Mac (CS2 requires rosetta) and I wouldn’t trust CS2 on anything newer than XP on the Windows side.
I know you’ve had success with it and I don’t think there’s harm in trying but thought it worth mentioning.
"Is CS6 fully patched to 8.0.2?" - yes (Win7 x64)
I will probably reinstall CS2 as suggested, but there are now too many revisions to the CS6 version document to go back to its CS2 predecessor.
I am surprised that the CS6 conversion has changed the CS2 document without giving any clue as to what the changes are (other than a CMYK setting change and 'missing' Helvetica fonts, since installed via the Adobe fonts folder) :-(
Incidentally, the Acrobat CS6 comparison checker reports that the character "1" is different in the CS6 PDF output (it looks like a 'box corner' symbol in the Acrobat note on the difference), but it looks visually correct in the CS6 PDF:
CS2 [Old text]: " "
CS6 [New text]: " [?993 ]"
I have relented and uninstalled ID CS6, then installed CS2 (+4.0.5 update) and then CS6 (+8.0.2 update), so that I could try the CS2 .inx conversion.
However, there appears to be an issue of reliable text searching within the resultant PDFs, which is worth reporting.
E.g. there are two instances of "advertising agent" in the ID CS2 document,
a) both of which can be searched for and found in this PDF version: ID CS2 > ID CS6 > PDF
b) but only *one instance* is evident in the alternative PDF: ID CS2 > .inx > ID CS6 > PDF (presumably because the missing instance appears as "adver tising agent" in the PDF)
So for text searching purposes in the output PDF, perhaps simply opening the CS2 document in CS6 might be best ?
Something strange is going on with that file. Your text should not be changing.
While you might think the direct conversion is a better path based on the current experience, I'll warn you that we see far too many reports here about files that suddenly develop fatal errors after a period of editing, and one very common factor is that these files were converted from previous version .indd files. THe export to .inx route, at least anecdotally is far safer.
Intuitively I'd be inclined to agree re the .inx conversion, but this is what the note in the Acrobat comparison process reports (the '...' are mine):
CS2 .inx to CS6 to PDF = [Old text]: "... , a n a d v e r t i s i n g a g e n t"
CS2 to CS6 to PDF = [New text]: "..., an advertising agent"
It's probably not relevant but the reason for upgrading was that the CS2 file was becoming absurdly bloated after trivial changes (from 9Mb to 16Mb after inserting a few characters), which saving to .inx and reopening the .inx file in CS2 wasn't helping. Previously the .inx route was a reliable way of compressing CS2 files which were becoming large.
All by itself, that last bit of information makes me think the CS2 file is damaged, and I wouldn't risk converting it from either the .indd or the .inx, but I'd export the stories to tagged text and rebuild from scratch.
Is that text justified, by the way, or have custom tracking?
The text is usually 'full justified' (with Optical kerning).
Unfortunately it is a fairly complex technical document with lots of numerical data and graphs (AI. images), which has already been proof-read a couple of times, so rebuilding at this stage is problematic. A good task for someone else to tackle, but regrettably there isn't a someone else !
The corrupted ID CS2 document has now been rebuilt using tagged text conversions, and is now only 3Mb, with .INX > .INDD conversions appearing to reducing the .INDD file size, rather than bloating each time.
However, the Acrobat X Pro 'Compare Documents' feature is less helpful than before (v6 Pro), e.g. showing spurious differences such as:
[Old text]: "personally-addressed"
[New text]: "personally-addressed"
and oddities like (perhaps flagging ID tagged text problems):
[Old text]: " METHODOLOGY"
[New text]: " MetHoDoLoGY"
[Old text]: " [?993 ]"
[New text]: " [?993]"
? = 'box corner' symbol. As this unanswered forum poster from 2011 says, 'Compare Documents' is too sensitive:
Acrobat X Pro Compare Documents To Sensitive
My ID report co-author is not interested in 'style' differences, only word/alphabetic variations.
There are several complaints on the Acrobat forums with the current Compare feature (which started in Acrobat 9 Pro and continues essentially unchanged through Acrobat XI Pro). I've not seen a good suggestion to fix it, however.
I've since located diffPDF (currently free, by qtrac, updates also in development ?) which seems to do pretty much what I require in terms of flagging simple text variations between two PDF documents. The zoning feature is useful in reducing false positives.
This is the version that I've tried (diffpdf-2.1.3-win32-static.zip from www.snapfiles.com):
File Size 5653 Kb
Last updated Oct 23, 2013