Map Series (seemingly) randomly exporting PDF as multiple pages since update to 3.4.2

[HollyTorpey_LSA]

Hi all,

I haven't figured out the pattern yet, but a couple of us at my workplace have recently noticed that a map series will suddenly start exporting to PDF as individual files for each page after exporting as a single file previously. We all use the same export preset for exporting layouts, if that matters. When this happens and we go to the Map Series tab of the Export Layout pane, it is set to Multiple Pages rather than Single File even though Single File is the default and was the setting the last time the layout was exported. 

The workflow that produced the issue this morning was this:

1. Yesterday I exported a map series layout as a single file. After that I summarized the attribute table of a layer that was in the layout and exported that to CSV. Then I saved and closed the project.

2. Today I opened the project and opened the layout. I made edits to the attributes of two features in the same layer that I had summarized the night before. Then I selected my export preset from the Export Layout item in the Share ribbon, changed the output path (which had reverted to my default folder) and then checked the Map Series tab of the Export Layout pane. It was set to one of the Multiple Pages options.

After I changed it back to Single File and exported, I saved my project and reopened it to see if I could reproduce the issue, but it was still on Single File. So I'm at a loss as to what is triggering it to change to Multiple Pages, but it happened to me twice yesterday in two different projects where I re-exported a map series that had previously been exported as a single file, and it has happened to one of my co-workers last week as well. We export map series very regularly and we have never noticed this issue prior to last week.

Anyone else noticing this?

[TomBole]

Hi @RTPL_AU 

I'm sure you would agree that a bug is still a bug. If you run into an issue please submit the issue to support. 

I think you would also agree that the Questions section of this Community site is not an optimal bug tracking system. Its great that information is shared and sometime this information is about bugs. This is understood. We glean information, such as with this thread, and if it is something we can replicate we log the issue for further investigation.

However, this is an informal system where information can be lost or miscommunicated as appears to be the case here on my part. Hopefully I can clear things up a bit.

There are 2 different systems, that I'm aware of, that track bugs. 

One is internal, that also includes bugs for software that is currently being developed. We try to address as many of these issues as we can so that customers like yourself do not run into these issues when that version of the software is released. This is the "private" system I was referring to. This system also includes issues found with released versions of the software - those reported by customers and those found and logged internally, after all, bugs do get missed. 

I apologize if I gave the impression that we have a cache of "secret" bugs that we hide from customers. We do not have a secret cache of bugs.

The other bug tracking system is the public one. One that you have access to and can track bugs. This one is tied to actual customers. This also includes the number of customers that the bug is affecting. These bugs carry more weight than bugs submitted internally, by people like myself.

That is why I encourage people to submit bugs through support. 

Hope this helps,

Tom

[RTPL_AU]

@TomBole - From Esri's point of view, what is a reasonable amount of time a paying customer should spend to replicate, document, and report an intermittent bug to a regional reseller; who then have to follow the process themselves to a level where they are comfortable submitting it to Esri Inc as a bug? 
Only for all of us to find out that it is a known issue and Esri Inc kept it quiet to judge the scale of the issue?

Can you see how this ends up smelling bad? I fully understand the logic behind the process and still think this should not be the status quo and that more transparency is required.

I have to make a call about the severity of the irritation of the combination of a Pro bug/feature and its workaround, and the time needed to report it vs doing real work that produces income. If I then decide to spend the time to report, which is not insignificant these days, I want to be sure it is not time wasted. Which it is if it is something that is not public yet well known and understood at Esri Inc.

I use this link to the Support Search to see what is going on. This list is incomplete based on your comment. 
https://support.esri.com/en-us/search?s=Newest&product=arcgis+pro&cardtype=support_bug_articles&vers...

If it was properly complete, I would be able to lodge a case and give the local reseller the bug number to lodge against, saving us all a lot of time; or decide that you have it handled and I can move on and do work.

It would be great if you could lodge this concern as an opportunity for quality improvement at your next internal issues & opportunities meeting.

[TomBole]

@RTPL_AU 

What is a reasonable amount of time to submit a bug? I think it depends on the customer, the issue, the priority of getting a fix, is there a workaround. In my opinion the answer to the question is mostly subjective. 

We have an imperfect system. Things slip through the cracks. I hope you would agree that we all are trying our best to get our individual jobs done the best that we can.

[RTPL_AU]

@TomBole by being more transparent you will help yourselves help yourselves.

Having a proper public repository of all submitted issues (only exception in my opinion should be security related) we, the people paying your salary, can make an informed choice about submitting an issue and spending time to work through it, or just finding a workaround and moving on (while also becoming more inclined to look for alternatives).

You acknowledge you have a problem. How do we (collectively) fix it?
Are you trying?  - not being snarky, Why  are you trying and not delivering? Where is Esri's focus? Traipsing around the world proclaiming being the Google or Facebook of spatial and solving all modern issues with headlining new features (except power consumption improvements it seems), or spending sufficient funds to get Pro back on track to where people are not averse to updates or still on near 5yr old versions due to showstopper bugs still not fixed? After 10 years, why is Pro still being sold as "New" to enterprises still on ArcMap 10.8.2? 

[SusanZwillinger2]

I encountered this bug using ArcGIS Pro 3.5.2.  The cause was that I had two aprx file open (working on 2 different client projects).  For one project, I was working on a layout with a map series and exporting to a Single PDF as well as to individual PDFs (without any problems initially).  I then exported a PNG of a single layout in the other project file and then closed that project file.  When I continued working on the first project, I lost the ability to export to a Single PDF.  The fix was easy thanks to this thread--just closed the project and started it again.

[RTPL_AU]

I've been running a different computer for the last few days (Esri reasons, not just new-gear-syndrome). 

PDF map series exports now consistently has Single Page as the default. 

I miss my broken Pro where Single Page disappeared from the options so I couldn't have Pro use it be accident.

I will almost never use Single Page so please Esri, implement setting the default method as an Option or allow me to disable Single Page until such time I need it. There are Ideas on the topic so just do what you do with other low-count Ideas and implement it regardless.

[SusanZwillinger2]

Check your side panel where the Catalog pane normally sits.  I’ve found that an Export tool that was opened in a different project file has shown up in my current project.  Once I close that, I’m able to export to multiple pages again.  I’ve noticed this pattern with other tools as well.  For example, if I’ve run the Suitability Analysis tool in a different project, this tab will automatically open in a different project file even if there is no suitability layer in the Contents pane.  If you’re like me and you have several tabs in the side panel (Catalog, History, Geoprocessing, Symbology, Label Properties, etc), it’s easy to miss an open “Export” tool to mess up your map series export to PDF.

[RTPL_AU]

Thanks @SusanZwillinger2 

Yep, I have a lot of stuff open at any given time.

For the PDF Export process of Map Series, the behaviour is different between two computers with pretty much the same setup & workflow.

It seems one pc PDF Export has pretty much forgotten about the 'Single Page' whereas on the other one the process works as expected (for now) - which I don't want as I don't ever use Single Page 🤣😭

Life in 2025 where you don't want to report a bug in case they fix it, eh?

[TomBole · Accepted solution]

All, 

A fix has been included in the latest 3.5 patch (3.5.3). The bug number is BUG-000178292.

Tom