You can't, you have to open it in Acrobat and do it there.
Think that sucks? Join the club.
But that was was of the reasons we upgraded so we didn't have to go to Acrobat to do the form work.
This diary gets changed regularly with over 270 - 300 fields. Doing it in 2 separate apps was a pain.
What on earth is the point of having a form field if you cant define the font - even if it is a basic pdf font.
C'm tell me you were joking - right?
Adobe - ?
I would loooooove to tell you I'm joking... Have a look at the last patr of this discussion here. Adobe has trumpeted this as a new feature, without telling people that unless you're the defaults kind of person it's not that useful. Perhaps they actually have forgotten that designers use InDesign?
Does it occur to you that perhaps they just didn’t have time to get all of this in?
You can’t have version two without version one.
Fill out a feature request: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
>You can’t have version two without version one.
That's why we all eagerly await Footnotes v.2. After all those years of developing since CS2 it *must* have some killer options by now!
Here's your new car - with new mp3 player doc
Wot - you need to control the volume? - no - this has a preset volume - once you plug in - that's it
put in a feature request!
This is a very basic requirement.
As any designer - be it on the web - in a pdf - on a printed page
Apart from actually putting the box on the page - this is the next most important thing (visually) - ie how it looks
No excuses - don't tell me I can edit forms when the only content control is size - thats a half baked solution.
Who on earth is going to want to see Times pop its head up in a form on a page of designed with sans serifs fonts.
Adobe seriously - if you are going to impliment a feature from one app to another - at least put in the options that the original app has had for X years.
Kind of a useless comment Bob. This isn't "version 1", far far from it. Form functionality was supposed to be greatly improved this release Bob and was touted as such here, there and everywhere, when in actually it's mediocre improvement at best. Seriously dissapointing Adobe. I guess we're going to have to wait til CS8 or 9 to get some of the features we need.
In the sense that this is the first time that ID can generate a PDF that has fields without the need to run form recognition in Acrobat, it really is version 1, but the larger picture is that the ID team controls ID, but the Acrobat team controls the code used to make the form fields, and they didn't enable all the features you or I might have wanted in the library they delivered to ID. I believe the rationale was related to security, but you can ascribe any motives you like if you're a conspiracy theorist.
Useless? What's useless is your clairvoyant look ahead to see when this feature will meet with your approval.
Not a conspiracy theorist, just annoyed that I can't deliver the product my client wants because the functionality doesn't exist.
Seriously Bob, that's the kind of sarcastic talk that's useless here. No one needs that kind of attitude.
From what I understand, the functionanlity that I'm needing the most, the ability for the end user to insert an image into a form, did exist in a previous version, and was removed.
Brad S. wrote:
Not a conspiracy theorist, just annoyed that I can't deliver the product my client wants because the functionality doesn't exist.
OK. I'll buy that you're not a conspiracy theorist, but to say that you can't deliver is a bit over the top. You still need Acrobat as well as ID, but you're a lot closer to the finsih line with CS6 than you were with earlier versions. As far as I know, you won't find any layout app that can do more.
Take your own advice Brad. You start with an attitude that what I said was useless. It's not only not useless but is correct.
I stand by it. This is the first shot at adding form tools to InDesign and a tremendous amount of work went in to it. Most users are quite happy with it...if they weren't you'd see a lot more than one or two people complaining about it. Is it perfect? No, but nothing is.
If you think this feature is as useless as my answers you can ignore both.
You're the one that started with the attitude with your "did it occur to you" comment. People are here looking for help, not sass.
Not over the top at all. I have a 17 page form that I've spent many hours styling in ID and the client loves it, but the client also wants to be able to insert up to 36 images in this service report. The only option therefore, that I'm aware of, is to use LiveCycle and abandon all the efforts made to style the document in ID. It's impossible to deliver the experience the client wants unless of course you can direct me to the instructions on how to insert images in a PDF form without using LiveCycle. I'm all ears. And not to derail this thread further, if you could post your instructions in this thread it would be greatly appreciated... http://forums.adobe.com/thread/743823
I think a big reason for poeple not using these forums to voice opinions, is they tend to get shot down by the evangelists, even if the points are valid.
If you look at this purely from a design utilility point of view....yes its a step in the right direction - but to announce it a major feature and miss something as vital and basic as being able to set a font in a form (don't care what the reason is) makes it feel more like a test plugin to boost sales and marketing than something tested and developed with user feedback.
Brad, I'd love to tell you how to make a "live" fillable image field in a form from ID, but I can't. I can't even tell you how to do it well in Acrobat, because as far as I know the program doesn't have that capability.
I actually wanted to create a form several years ago for a local high school reunion where the graduates could not only fill in their data, but add a photo. I asked over in Acrobat, and got an answer, but the ability to place an image didn't include the ability to scale or center it, so wasn't usable for our purposes. Live Cycle was suggested, but aside from cost as I recall we couldn't get a real PDF back that could then be printed. We ended up disributing a form built in Acrobat Pro that respondents could save as a PDF and return as an email attachment along with a photo as a separate attachment. I built a template in ID into which both were placed as links. This got old after only 80 responses, so I know how frustrating it is for you not to be able to do what you want in ID, but if you have Live Cycle available, that's probably always going to be a better choice for complex form design.
And can we ALL try to keep the conversation a bit more on the adult dialog track here?
If you’re looking for InDesign to replace LiveCycle I think you’re going to be waiting for a very, very long time.
This is a major feature upgrade (contrary to some opinions) but no feature in InDesign is intended to replace another application. SWF animations for instance are not intended to replace Flash and these form tool features aren’t intended to replace LiveCycle.
And this is a user to user forum. If you’d like to voice your concerns to Adobe you can do so here: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
I suggest doing so with full details on not only WHAT you want but WHY.
Figured out how to make this work, in a bit of a 2 program work around.
Create your form, with correct font sizes at least in InDesign\
Esport as interactive PDF of course
Open in acrobat pro and edit fields, under appearence in the field properties window you can change font and color.
Not sure if this was stated or if it cures your ills but sure did for me.
Which is fine unless you have a large form with lots of different fields and sizes. Then you might as well just go back to Acrobat full time. Honest - Indesign forms is a half baked implementation.
InDesign forms is a version 1 implementation. It's just the way it is.
And as the old saying goes, “you can’t have version 2 without version 1.”
And as the saying goes " If you are going to do a job, do it properly"
Sooo ... any news on Footnotes v.2, yet?
Jongware, that's just what I was thinking when he said that!
But it could be our logic is faulty: The statement "For every version 2
there is a version 1, therefore for every version 1 there is a version
2" is clearly false. On the other hand, perhaps in reality it is also
false to say, "For every version 2 there is a version 1" because
sometimes version 2 is launched without a version 1. But "For every
second version there was a first version" is, I think, always true. So
what about, "For every first version there is a second version"? I think
that must be true too, otherwise it would be "Version 1", not "first
version." So the question is, Is the the current implementation of
footnotes in InDesign "Version 1", or is it "the first version"?
I've had non stop issues with the form function and not only purched the upgrade for the form functionality but promised it's efficacy to a client (based on the Adobe presentation). Until the functionality has been debugged to the point where it actually works as promoted, on multiple pdf viewers, versions etc. it is simply not living up to its promise, and embarrassing me in the process. FAIL.
Multiple PDF viewers? Not likely....EVER. Have you looked at what you are exporting to? It's not PDF, it's Adobe PDF.
For those of you wishing enhance features, discussing them here is fine, but you'd do far better to make your feelings known here: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
When you do make sure to state your case clearly. Simply saying you want font choices in form fields isn't going to get much attention. You'll need to state why and how it will benefit the users.
Well, finally I got the answer for this. The functionality is completely useless in countries that use scandinavian letters (Ä,Ö,Å) - they show as cryptic symbols because the default font, and not being able to change it. I still cannot believe that it is even possible to leave out the possibility to change a font for real...
Its clear this 'feature' was an attention grabber that in reality failed to deliver on a basic level.
Q: Is the choice of font important to users in a page/form layout app - errrm, don't know better check the wish list - c'mon!
No doubt there will be a follow up evangelist retort. All I can say is - as a user its obvious this 'feature' has been implimented 'half baked'.
You've been in this thread from the beginning, so you already know this feature was released at a less than perfect state because it was felt that what they could offer was better than nothing for many users (and apparently you are not one of those who finds the limited feature better than no feature), and that much of the code required to add the things that are still missing needs to come from the Acrobat team, and they don't share well.
Is it really "completely" useless? Is it not faster to build the form in ID and fix the fonts in Acrobat than it would be to make the whole thing in Acrobat?
Mr Spier: my point, and no doubt for many others also, is that it is ridiculous to market this as one of the major enhancements of CS6. Come on, changing the font, how difficult can that be? It does not say in the marketing material that "yes, you can make your forms in ID, but you have to change the font in Acrobat" - luckily I downloaded the trial first, before buying.
That leads to another funny thing: I called today to the technical support abou this. Guess what they said. They told that since you have purchased only the CS5.5 and have a trial version of CS6, I cannot help you in any way... I tried to tell him that I would understand your point if I did not have the recent version purchased, and had only the trial, but it really makes no sense at this time, because I have really donloaded the trial for evaluating if I get my moneys worth by upgrading. So I got not help there...
Come on, changing the font, how difficult can that be?
It's impossible without Acrobat code that is not available to the ID team. Do you REALLY think that option would have been left out if they could have provided it, even if it was difficult?
You may have a reasonable complaint against the marketing department, but it certainly isn't valid against the developers. I've yet to need to use the form functions, but I think that even in their "limited" capabilities that are a "major" new feature comapred to waht I had to go through in the past to create forms, in the same way that I think smart guides were major.
The only free support Adobe provides is for installation issues with purchased versions.
If you haven't even purchased it, you have very little to complain about. Stick with whatever you have and toil away in Acrobat creating your forms.
For me, the first answer here gave the most important element of information.
When Bob said "Does it occur to you that perhaps they just didn’t have time to get all of this in?"... Well yes, it sure did occur to me! And my reply to this would be: "What if they had taken a little more time and made sure they'd managed to have a function that is a little more complete before releasing the newer version?".
This has been my main issue with any company that releases products on an (almost) yearly basis: OBVIOUSLY they won't have time to complete everything!
Maybe, I'm only saying maybe, Adobe could have waited a liiiiitle bit longer and provided a finished product. Now of course, people will always have a new feature in mind, or a genius idea that they'd like to see happen in a program.
I also know that the high management would have been pushing for everything to be ready "on time", but then if you know you won't finish it, leave it out!
I was also very much looking forward to the new feature in InDesign as I have to make multiple copies of the same form translated into various languages.
And I had the very same problem as jahallaa, but with our French versions of these PDF forms.
So, yes, having the option to create the form in InDesign is a great for most of it. Fortunately, the font choice for our forms isn't all that important for me, in this specific case, so it wouldn't matter which font is used IF only it would understand accentuated letters properly.
Also, reading several times that "the Acrobat team didn't provide all the codes to the InDesign team" leaves me a little perplexed... If they are not going to get a complete code, then maybe, once more, they should wait until they get the complete thing. Now, of course, I don't know why the code would be provide incomplete, whether it's competition between the teams, security or plain weirdness but still... If you're going to implement a feature, make sure it fills in the major bullet points! If it doesn't, well give the marketing a rest and wait for the next release!
Now after saying all this... When our files are translated, they have to be converted into an IDML file to be compatible with our translation tool. I then have to reimport them into InDesign to finalise them, once translated.
Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure they will lose the forms function in the process, seen that this function didn't exist in CS 5 or 5.5 and that the IDML file loses any function that is not downcompatible.
Dammit!! I'll now have to fiddle around with 2 files and import layers and such...
Ah well... Sorry, rant's over!
Little Red Frog
I've previously used Acrobat to create and edit forms, and I'm working with forms in InDesign CC for the first time.
All was going well until I realized there was no way to specify the default font for text boxes. In fact, I assumed this lack of functionality was actually a bug.
In my search for a way to do this in ID without having to revert back to using Acrobat for something this basic, I came across this thread. Since this is an old thread and pertains to CS6, I was really hoping that by the time they go to CC it would be there, but alas, it isn't.
So, based on @Bob's comment "You can’t have version two without version one," I think it's safe to say that we are officially on ver 1.5.
Does anyone happen to know when we can expect to see version 2?
LoL @ you and your expectations.
ie. be happy with what you've got and don't question it. Adobe with spoon feed you half baked features when they damn well feel like it.
Let's get constructive!
While it's frustrating that Acrobat is required for changing the form field fonts — here's the workflow that I used in a relatively lengthy document.
Think about the naming of your form fields (name them in a way that lets you know what type styling they should have) this will help you once you're editing in Acrobat.
- Export as Interactive
- Open in Acrobat
- Click on Tools / Forms / Edit
- <list of all the fields drops in below>
- You can now shift and cmd select the like fields that you want to change the properties on — just right-click on a selected field and choose 'properties' — you could select all if you only had form fields and wanted one type style.
This brought my editing time down SIGNIFICANTLY, althought it still has to be done for every 'final' export. Hope this helps with the workflow until there's a better solution.
Thanks Doug, that actually is the same workflow we follow.
The problem I (and apparently many others) have, is that when working with a very simple form, being able to set something as basic as the font directly InDesign would eliminate the need for that extra step.
We typically have 30+ documents that need to be updated at a time, so having to edit everything in Acrobat adds a considerable amount of time to the process.
Of course, it would also be helpful if the border color and size that you set on a text field in ID actually carried over to the exported PDF, but I digress.
Perhaps a little bit of history would be instructive.
Before InDesign CS6, you couldn't even create a PDF form in InDesign that would be directly useable in Acrobat. You could create the general look of the form and put squares and circles. You would open it in Acrobat Pro and hope that what you created might partially be translated into form fields.
In its first iteration of PDF forms, InDesign does perhaps 90% of the work. All of a sudden, we want it all. I'm sure, if we're all a little more patient, it will come. Just send feature requests here so the product manager knows your desire.