I am facing the same problem. I am doing the layout of epub and need to anchor object in full page in background behind the text frame, but its not working. see attached image and help please.

When I place a picture to be set in line with text-it doesn't place properly. It places it way above where I want it. This only started happening when we switched to Google fonts.

Chiming in - I'm setting up a list of travel locations on a map - as new points of interest are added or removed, the list shifts frequently. The client wants the list "bulleted" with numbers in colored boxes, where the colors communicate different things about the destination. I found this thread while trying to find a way to make this bulleting clean and consistent - currently the colored boxes are located on a layer below the bullet list, and have to be manually positioned to align with each number, and every time the content within moves they all have to be adjusted again.

I was hoping that I could anchor the little boxes to the header lines so they would follow their associated bullets, but if they're going to cover the bullet numbers, the point is moot. The only other way I can think that would keep me from having to adjust for the shifting baselines every single time there's a change would be to have a custom font/character set to use for bullets, which is quite a tall ask for a bullet with a background.

Example: all headings begin with an illustration and the heading text is meant to run on top of this illustration. The illustration ought to be anchored to the heading.

There is no good workaround. You have to keep moving the illustrations manually to where the headings are.

It is very simple, if you put object behind text and anchor it to text it should remain behind text and not get moved in front of it like it works right now. The anchor option just doesn't work as intended in any case where anchored object is below what ever you are anchoring it to. Anchor should honor InDesign object layering. There is no workaround for this. Why is this not fixed as of December 2021? :(

As the OP has not responded to Abhinav, allow me.

In our situation, we have a specific table layout with anchored images. Sometimes a font extends past the bounds of the table cell. See attached. Top example, font resides with the cell. Bottom example, the V extends outside the cell, under the anchored image. To fix this currently, I'll have to shift all images left by a small amount. Changing cell padding at this stage is not be feasible.

Thus, being able to arrange an anchored object is very useful.

This is the second major flaw in indesign I come across in 1 DAY, the other being with gpu performance activated the text will disappear until scrolling or zooming in/out). And it's the second major flaw that adobe doesn't want to do anything about SINCE YEARS AGO!
How is this possible, how such a big company can ignore the needs of so many customers is beyond me.

Another example. I can't send this transparent and anchored image behind the text even when trying to do this from layers panel.

YES this would be super helpful. I was having trouble with this earlier in the year and had to try all different things to get what I needed.

here are two quick examples:

(1) Say I want to set an initial icon into the beginning of a paragraph and I want it anchored to the beginning of the first line of that paragraph, the wrap wont hold on that first line—see screenshots 1 & 2

(2) Say I want to set an image at the top of a page, but the specific mention of said image is below the image's placement. Ideally I would want to anchor the image to it's mention in the text, but placing an anchored image before its anchor disables the wrap—see screenshots 3 & 4.

Here's one: I have an annual report for a large development charity. They have projects all over the world. There is a section for each continent. Each of these sections begins with a map of the continent positioned behind the text. All the text is in one story, which is edited as I work on the layout. Some projects are added or omitted to the AR as I work. If the continental map were an inline graphic I could save a bunch of time. The workaround is the maps are not inline graphics so have to be moved separately from the text.

@Abhinav there are plenty of examples in the comments of those voting even if not in the original post.

> Can you help us understand the key problems that you face in the absence of ability to send an anchored image backwards?

At the moment it is impossible and there's no real workaround that isn't inconvenient or easily understood by everyone who may have to work on the same file.

The behaviour of the anchored objects has two behaviours that are inherently frustrating:
1) The anchored object will appear one stack above the type it is being anchored to; and
2) Will not text wrap around any objects that appear on the same line or earlier in a story (Pariah Burke's video does a good job explaining this: https://youtu.be/cwgdGM4dQ6A and provides a workaround that can easily be undone by anyone else unfamiliar with the workaround who has to work on the same file)

An instance of why you may want an anchored object to appear underneath the text could be a stylised heading like the attached photo. Currently, this is done by having the graphic on a stack below the type that is simply floating; but if the type moves, the graphic will stay where it is. The purpose of anchoring the graphic is that if the type moves, the picture follows it; but currently this is only in the X and Y axis, not the Z-axis of stacking where the only level of control is for the anchored object to be one stack above the type.

Another example. Right now I'm designing a book with hundreds of underlying elements. I cannot anchor them, because they will cover the text. So, any modification in the text is producing a shift and I have to redo all the work.

@Abinav Kaushik:
Sometimes we insert boxes (filled with pictures, illustration or whatever) within the text. We want those boxes to flow with the text. For example, when we work on a longer text that gets certain text addition in the course of the text design, we want the box to follow its anchor through the pages.
So it is necessary that the pictures flow with the text so it can keep its position in the text, not on a certain page.
But when you insert a picture/a box anchored in text, the text always wraps around. There is no possibility to insert a Box in text that is printed over. To "send back" in our case here means that we want the text to ignore the box wrapping and to print over the box . (because there is an option in the text settings of the programm that says "text wrapping only affects boxes that appear above the text box" (Sorry, I do not know the correct translation). So, when you "send the box to the background", it means, the text can flow over the box. That would really be a useful implementation!

I also agree with stephen, as anchored objects cannot be wraped, its a major problem when I work on a large book document, with lots and lots of photographs inserted in it.

When anchoring an object to a line in a text frame, and you need the text to wrap around the object, the line which you anchored the object to, does not wrap. (See screenshot_2.jpg)

Also, the anchored object cannot be put behind the text frame or any other object which is behind the text frame.

i need it when i want to place an ornamnet below heading text. usually it's done with custom position. not inline

Yes x 1000! I had a client recently tell me that the font was wrong in one of my documents. It turns out that I had placed a PSD with a clipping path, as an anchored object. So all the text in the text frame was rasterized and looked bold. If I was able to have anchored objects in back, this wouldn't have been a problem.

It is a bit like hanging a swing on a branch before you plant the tree. It could mean that the whole page needs to be loaded before it can be drawn, like it used to be on the old RIPs. What you are asking for is that object stacking should be non sequential. It's a nice Idea from designer perspective but a big ask. :) I'm in if it can be done.