What's absurd is putting an object into a layout, adding a text wrap to it and then complaining that it works as designed.
Go into the layer options for the layer its on. You should be able to figure it out from there.
And then consider the possibility that people turn off layers so they can work on text without a distraction but still need the wrap applied.
Thanks for your attention, but please re-read my post, Bob. The text is wrapping around an image that is not visible, an image I'm not using on that page, an image that is on a different layer that is TURNED OFF. The text is wrapping around an empty space in the page. It is wrapping around nothing, nothing at all. The image that it is reacting to is not there. It is gone, gone, gone.
I did read it and unless you actually deleted the image, everything is
working as it's supposed to. If you did delete you may have left the
frame which has the wrap applied.
In any event, simply turning off a layer does not kill the text wrap
unless you explicitly set that in the layer options.
Turning off the visibility of something doesn't delete it.
I know it doesn't delete it, but it makes no sense that the text would still wrap around something that is not there. I cannot think of a single instance when I have wanted that to occur, going back to QXP ca1988. When would you want text to wrap around an object that is not visible? If it is working as designed, however, then thanks for letting me know. I can work arouind it and that kind of information is what this forum is for, not for expressing puzzlement. That said, this is about the stupidest feature I think I've ever seen. Thanks again for putting me straight.
I can't remember exactly but I think Harbs showed to a bunch of us hanging around the hall at the last PepCon. It's a bug. But I don't think he showed any fix. It's close to Shabbot in Israel right now. So he may not be available to respond for a day.
Not visible and not there are two different things. I already gave you
one example of why it works that way and how to turn it off with one
If that's not the case, please explain exactly what is going on. Did you
or did you not delete the object? Turning off the visibility is not the
same as deleting it.
Sandee, I'm not at all sure why you think this is bug if it's simply a
wrap around a hidden object.
Interesting, but why would you want the text to wrap when there is nothing there? It seems to be that the default should be that images on hidden layers automatically kill the text wrap. 99.999 percent of the time this is what you would want.
Is this how this example was published, with the jagged left margin (as in your middle image) meandering around a void on the page?
Wow, you certainly know how to make someone angry.
Yes, this is how it was published. Meandering. A void.
Last time I try to help you.
Computer Graphics Trainer
Jeez, you only see your own workflow as valid?
Because that's exactly what you're saying here. For the final time, open
the layer options and click the choice to suppress text wrap.
Debating this is a ridiculous waste of my time. Continue on ranting if
Geez, I wasn't trying to make anyone angry, I just wanted to describe it accurately so you'd know what I was talking about. If everyone agrees that it is more helpful to have the default to wrap around invisible objects then fine. For me, I've never needed to do that. I've only used text wrap to wrap around visible images. I wasn't making a value judgement on your design. You need to find another business if you see personal attacks from a simple disinterested description of your work. I still think it is very, very rare to need text to wrap around something that is not visible. That is all I'm saying. Does everyone disagree?
Everyone? Probably not...but I certainly do. Try working on layouts for
DPS with MSOs and you'll see why both choices are important.
It's a simple setting. One freakin' click and you're making a major deal
out of it.
Most often, layers are hidden as a temporary working measure. If you don't want the content of a particular layer, (and the effects of its presence), on your page ever again, then delete it.
Sometimes it helps to turn off a layer so you can more easily select other objects that might be obscured, is one example of when this would be a good thing. Layers are GLOBAL and I wouldn't like to see my threaded text rewrapping because I turned off a layer temporarily and there was a wrapped object on some page other than the one where I'm working trying to get a precise fit or position.
I don't want to reopen a wound, but I think Mike has a point.
I have just spent an hour trying to work out why every text frame on one particular page is overset. It turned out that I had created a black square to give the page a black background, didn't like it and turned it off (didn't want to delete it in case I changed my mind and didn't want to spend time recreating it again). Left it and forgot it, now all of a sudden the page is repelling text for no apparent reason.
I know I am a noob but try searching help for "How do I find out WTF my text is wrapping around?" You won't find anything and if you delete the page you get "This page contains objects - are you sure?" To which the answer is always NO because I have deleted too many objects by mistake to ignore THAT warning.
I can also see the case for temporarily turning off a layer so it isn't a distraction while preserving wrapping to preserve the overall formatting. These two things seem to be incompatible. I think hiding a layer should kill the wrap unless you specify that wrap must remain ON for testing purposes.
We often learn from mistakes, and you likely will remember to check layers henceforth.
I work on many documents I did not create - there are quick checks needed for any document.
Check the Layers panel
Check for Styles
Perform several "Select All" commands. Empty frames are common and problematic.
Toggle Overprint Preview
Derek is reiterating my point. That the default is backward. A person's intuition would suggest that turning off a layer would also defeat the text wrapping around objects on that layer. If you wanted the text to wrap around missing/invisible objects, then you could invoke it. This would eliminate Derek's problem without eliminating this "feature." It is all about what the default should be. For me, it should always be what a reasonable person would infer would happen. That is not presently the case with text wrapping.
The default is backward for YOU. It's 100% correct for me. You're making up your mind about what's reasonable based on your own need. I disagree. Any reasonable experienced user knows the value of the layer panel and how it behaves. You're blaming the application for your own lack of knowledge.
It seems to me the real problem here is people jumping into a complicated layout application without actually learning how it works.
I think hiding a layer should kill the wrap unless you specify that wrap must remain ON for testing purposes.
I don't mean to be snarky, but I think that you need to know what all of the permutations of all the settings will do. It's a tall order, I know, but I'm with Daniel here. I work almost exclusively on documents I didn't create, so I've seen files that required that setting to be on for some workflows, and files that required that setting to be off for other workflows. And, of course, I've seen graphic designers pitch fits about what settings they thought ought to be default for all workflows.
This thread seems to be heavy on the fit-pitching, to be honest. A good workflow will sometimes require conventions that will make light work of some particular task that, in other workflows, would require vast amounts of manual clicking-about. But this is a convention. You get to choose what value you have set for this behavior. It's hard to figure out, but that's what you get when you work in a decade-old page-layout app with buckets of functionality. There are lacunae and dead ends and almost-impossible-to-find toggles that will affect everything in your layout. There are features that are inaccessible by any means but scripting. It's kind of a mess sometimes, but despite the steep learning curve and the abandonded feature-sets that haven't seen a lick of new code since 2006, this app is the industry standard, so it's best to just clamber up the steep learning curve and remember that one person's counterintuitive stumbling block is another person's most important feature.
Like Daniel just said, I have a suite of things I do to every document to test it for, um, funkiness. I have some carefully groomed preflight profiles in both ID and Acrobat that help me find the stuff that will be problematic. I have scripts that act as blink comparitors, scripts that color invisible objects with magenta, scripts that unlock all objects, and so on. Rather than fire off missives about what ought to be default, I suggest that you figure out a way to make the app work for you. I bet that it would take me about fifteen minutes to write the startup script that would always set this value in the direction that you want it set for every document that you touch, and I am a very slow script developer.
I should get Bob to teach me Ten Tricks Of Incredibly Efficient Posters.
TL, DR: What he said.
That could be arranged.
Whether i works 100 percent of the time for you and not 100 percent of the time for me doesn't matter. Two data points don't amount to much. As a designer I have to try to figure out what large numbers of people would do when confronted with something: a coffee maker, a car dashboard or software. All I'm saying in this case is that, in my opinion, if you took the time and expense to have a statistically significant sample of new InDesign users work with the program a majority of them would infer that off layers negate text wrapping. That is all I'm saying. It may not be possible to impliment this in an old piece of software, but I'm simply doing a thought experiment about it...at least at this point. Obviously what Joel says is absolutely true with the real world use of the software. You need to figure outs its quirks and rough spots. If, however, everyone always just accepted what was fed to them we'd never see any advancement in anything.
New users? That's irrelevant here, IMO.
Long time users have seen this behavior for 14 years. And now you want
to change it? Sorry, but its your responsibility as a new user to learn
how it works.
As I said when this first came up...it's a simple freakin' click...and
it's document specific, so if it was set that way by whoever supplied
the file, it would still be set that way when you got it. So what
difference would the default make?
I'll answer that for you...none. Not one little bit.
Mike Fernbank wrote:
All I'm saying in this case is that, in my opinion, if you took the time and expense to have a statistically significant sample of new InDesign users work with the program a majority of them would infer that off layers negate text wrapping. That is all I'm saying.
Mike your point about the feature is not lost on me, but I'm not sure how it is you see yourself inside the minds of "a majority of new InDesign users," and make an assertion based on your opinion of what they would infer.
Thinking about it; my study group would be one of experienced page designers. I'd have them meticulously set challenging type throughout a long document full of text-wrapped graphics on a dedicated layer. Then I'd instruct them to hide that layer to help gain access to a layer below. In my opinion, if the text wraps went away too, the instantaneous mass-reflow of carefully set type would cause them to lose control of their internal plumbing.
Just illustrating the other side of the coin.
Anytime you have a binary choice for a feature and need to set a default it's guaranteed to be wrong for half your users. That's just a fact of life, and it's also why you get to make the choice to change it.
As the old saying goes, when you come to a fork in the road, take it.
Yes, we all have different ways of working, and I think it's good when software lets me work as I want without making you work that way too. When you first load ID, you have default settings. If you want, you can change them, but some settings are saved with the document. If I open your document, I have to deal with some of your settings, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I can change them to what I like. The problem is when you don't know why something is happening because of a setting, which is where this thread started.
If I didn't know what a duck was, I couldn't identify it by a quack. One I hear the quack and learn it's a duck, I hope that I will remember the next time I hear a quack. I imagine that the OP (and onlookers) have learned that text wrapping around (seemingly) nothing is the quack, and that objects with wrap on hidden layers is the duck. I'm pretty sure that the next file that the OP opens that has this issue, he will remember what to look for, and how he can make it work the way he wants instead of the way the person who created the file wants.
Sorry Bob but I don't find your contributions particularly helpful. What I think Mike and I are saying is that the default setting is counter-intuitive. We are not saying that we don't like it just because it doesn't suit our way of working. While I am new to ID I am not new to desktop publishing and I have been using Adobe products since CS3. Sometimes being new to a product allows you to see that something is back-to-front whereas someone who has used it all day for ever will be totally blind to the logic, having grown accustomed to it.
I don't think I am 'jumping into a complicated application with actually learning how it works'. I am learning how it works and what I learn leads me to comment that this feature is counter-intuitive. If you tell me that turning off a layer merely makes it invisible then I suggest you call that 'making it invisible'. Turning a layer 'off' seems to suggest that it should cease to exert an influence on the document. If it continues to exert an influence other steps will be required to turn it 'off'.
Since Adobe has changed its charging structure, you will find these products being used by a lot of 'new' users. You were a new user once. While I am familiar with Dreamweaver, Fireworks and Acrobat, I now want to get to grips with Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign. I can cope with the lack of consistency across products with respect to basic functions. Learning that PageDown doesn't move down a page is OK (I suppose, it's not really) but finding out 'off' in ID doesn't mean 'off' is just a waste of time and raises the bar for new users. Saying 'once you know about this you can set it how you like' presupposes that you know about it. New users don't start with documents from others that have been adapted in the way that is most intuitive, they start with the default settings. It's not a binary flip of a coin. You have to be thoughtful about the default.
Please at least consider the fact that the power users on this forum may be too heavily invested in the current way of doing things to want any changes at all.
"That's a manhole, it's been here for 14 years - next time you come down here you'll remember to walk around it like everyone else", is a funny approach.
Sorry Bob but I don't find your contributions particularly helpful.
Then we're even.
Turning a layer 'off' seems to suggest that it should cease to exert an influence on the document. If it continues to exert an influence other steps will be required to turn it 'off'.
Turning off a layer may seem to suggest that to you, but to me it means I don't want to see it but I don't want my layout completely messed up because of it's turned off.
There is no way you will convince me that deactiving visibility of an object or a layer should have any effect on any other item on any other layer. It's a visibility setting. Nothing else. If you turn off all the lights in a room, you'll still trip on that pair of sneakers left on the floor. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.
Honestly, I don't even understand why this thread has gone on and on and on. We all have defaults we don't like. But that's the beauty of them...you can change them.
And in case you missed it. The whole reason for this thread, IIRC, is that someone got a file from someone else and couldn't figure out what was going on. Becasue the layer properties are specific to each layer in each document even if the default were different, the file that the was received would have acted the exact same way.
You want it changed? I suggest a post here: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
And you'll need to make a very strong case for any feature to be considered including how it will benefit MOST of the users.
OK, don't know if anyone is still around to respond.... months later - but... I'm a newbie first of all - with a similar problem that's driving me crazy. I deleted the whole text frame where I once was having the gnarly problem of the text wrapping around an invisible frame within the text frame. Started up with a brand new text frame in that same part of the page and lo and behold, it was doing it again!! Couldn't find any layers that were the culprit. Very frustrating....
thx for any replies -
When you first worked on the document, was the invisible frame that the text was wrapping around any of the following:
- On the same layer as the text it was pushing?
- On a different layer as the text it was pushing?
- Anchored within the same text frame that contained the text it was pushing? (And, if so, did you paste the same text into the new frame, which would have also pasted the anchored object?)
Also, have you tried unlocking and unhiding all objects on the spread via the Object menu? It could be that you aren't seeing it because it's hidden, and you can't touch it because it's locked.
Might also be on the master page....
turn off the wrap for that frame, if you dont need it at all.
or find the guilty frame, it HAS to be in some place
HI there - I'm trying to understand your reply - it might take awhile, but I'm working on it - in terms of layers, I saved the doc and played around with erasing each and every layer to see if that made a different and it didn't. At this point, I don't know is the answer to your 3 questions -
Did go to Object menu and nothing was locked or hidden
great thought - but alas, I hadn't put anything on the master page but the page numbers!
definately turned off the wrap for that frame - no change - thx though
My olnly options as I see it is to put another picture in that same place that keeps insisting that a picture is there - pretty dismall way to solve the problem though!! haha.
OK - WOW - I'm getting a little closer - (by accident)! I had to go to edit, select all, cuz I wanted to flip the page 180 degrees and lo and behold, a little frame appeared in the mystery spot!! I'm now troubleshooting with that!
It doesn't show as a frame when I just highlight the larger text frame that it is inside of , so I can't just go in and delete it