Improve slide-level layout control
Johnathan Lightfoot
When using Gamma through the API, builders often need predictable deck structure, not just a good-looking result.
It would help if the API allowed slide-level layout instructions, such as problem slide, comparison slide, three-step process, image-left/text-right, summary card, or call-to-action slide.
This would make generated decks more consistent and useful for proposals, reports, training materials, and repeatable business workflows.
Nik Payne (Gamma design)
Johnathan Lightfoot this is super helpful, thank you. Totally get the need for predictable, repeatable structure when you’re generating decks via API, not just “looks good.” I’ll pass this to the team.
Quick question so we can make it actionable: if you could add slide-level layout control in one way, would you prefer (a) choosing from a fixed set of named templates like “comparison” or “3-step process,” or (b) a more flexible schema where you specify regions like image-left/text-right plus constraints?
Johnathan Lightfoot
Nik Payne (Gamma design) I'd phase it, but if v1 has to be one thing: fixed named templates.
For most API/automation cases, named layouts — comparison, 3-step process, image-left/text-right, summary, timeline, quote, problem/solution, CTA — deliver value fastest. They're easy to understand, easy to validate, and predictable in workflows.
A flexible schema with regions and constraints would be powerful, but it's also more complexity and more ways for a request to break weirdly. That feels like v2 or an advanced mode.
So: v1 = named templates, v2 = optional schema for power users. Builders get something reliable first, control comes later.