.: NICKY G. :.

Dear Affinity friends, this post is dated 2018, today version 2.0 of the suite was released and there have been no improvements regarding the guides. Honestly it's one of the things (few I should say, but the few that still make me give up on Illustrator, and believe me I hate Illustrator since day one after switching from Freehand MX). Honestly, I find the management of the guides and this panel very inconvenient and perhaps useless (but really a lot). I also want to understand the usefulness that having a panel with a list of all the values of the guides could give, and as long as they are few it is manageable but when they start to be many how do we manage it? I have memorized 30 guides, I would like to figure out the X guide on the artboard what value it corresponds to in the guides panel to be able to move it, well I can't figure it out.!!!! I believe that the guides (as happens in that damned Illustrator) should be selectable, highlightable (even more than one as the other user suggested) and movable from the transform panel in the XY axes. Or if I click on the value list in the guide panel, the guide on the corresponding table should be highlighted (but to understand which guide I'm changing the values for. (before changing the value, because I could select the wrong guide) If I have a path created with a particular shape and I would like to transform it into a guide, could I do it? I do not think. I think this section needs to be reviewed a lot. How the guides panel should be immediately selectable (not only from a key command that has not been assigned), but also from a button in the toolbar, or by double-clicking on a guide... For me Affinity Designer has incredible potential compared to ALL the competition, but many things should be reviewed, simplified, standardized, improved...

True, I agree. I am an Ai user (I have switched from the beloved Freehand MX 11 to Ai) but honestly I have always HATED Ai! Because it sucks, it's not practical, Not at all accurate! figured with so many bugs it was better than Freehand. I would like to switch to AF Designer, I see its potential, fluidity, speed .... but I also see many shortcomings such as shape tools etc. etc. (you will find my posts of requests, many) ... I just learned, seeing the video a few posts above, that even INKScape has improved a lot, and it's free. I just downloaded it and take a look at it, I saw there are also a lot of tutorials on YT. I'll give it a little thought.

VectorStyler: da quello che vedo è la FUSIONE di: Adobe Illustrator, Affinity Designer, Corel Draw and INKScape Affinità Quando ti svegli? Sbrigati.

and I didn't understand anything ... how do you activate the first and last menu? PS: so I can only align to the first and last object? if I have 5 elements how do I align it to the third 1 2 (3) 4 5

Sure there are things AD can't do, I was wondering if these basic Illustrator functions are done in Designer ?? - Alignment to Key Object. I have 4 Objects and I want to align them based on a specific object of the 4 how do you do it? - is it possible to convert a simple path into GUIDE? - is it possible to select a guide and move it numerically without the Guide Management panel? and if it is not possible, having so many guides, how can I understand Which guide does measure X correspond to? (6.55 mm). Although selecting a numerical value does not highlight which guide it refers to, I believe that the selection of the guide on the table should "highlight its corresponding value". Kind of how it works in AI. Honestly, apart from Column Guides and Margins, I don't understand the usefulness of a panel for guides. That is, it would also be useful if it worked properly. In this better AI sincerely even without a management panel. Then if I have 10 guides already set and I want to move all 10 by + 10mm I should do it one by one. In AI you select all 10 and give us a shift of +10 on the X axis ... Hope to give you suggestions. - I believe AD can far surpass AI in power and accuracy but sometimes it lacks the small and silly things that seem silly but essential in the workflow.

+10 Here is an INDISPENSABLE thing that is currently missing. For those who work in the press it is a vitally important function to check the color separation so as not to expect surprises in the press.

It would be a great thing if it were realized, also to implement many small shortcomings that Affinity designer still has compared to the competition. Equalized these small shortcomings AD has all the credentials to become a valid and better alternative for vector drawing.

THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT DO NOT LET US GO FROM THE HATEFUL ILLUSTRATOR TO AFFINITY DESIGNER: 1. The creation of Dynamic shapes (shape builder tools) 2. The management of the guides !!! (although it is useful to have a guide management panel), I think it is VERY LITTLE INTUITIVE AND RHINESTONE: a) impossible to select a specific guide to move it on the X Y axis, or better if I have a job with 100 registered guides how do I know which value corresponds to the x guide? if you have to move it to see which value changes to understand the corresponding value in the panel. it would be more logical to handle similar to how it works in ADOBE. b) unable to select all guides c) impossible to have a visual reference between the value of the guide recorded in the panel and the actual guide on the drawing board d) impossible to convert vector object into guide e) unable to select and guides to clone them on a new table In practice it would be all to review the guide management 3. creation of a circle passing through 2 or 3 points (essential for the geometric creation of shapes) 4. visualization of the separation of the RGB / CMYK / SPOT channels for the pre-press verification of the color selections also the display of color overprint 5. perspective creation 6. 3d drawing (like AI) .... I strongly believe that affinity designer already has extraordinary potential that Illustrator in his 30 years of career has never had, especially in speed, lightness of the software and precision in drawing (which is fundamental for a vector design software), Ai is really bad in this, but it remains a standard. I hope Affinity will make a move to close the (albeit minimal) gap with the competition.

+1 shape builder tool for Affinity Designer

I think it's a small implementation that is missing in AD! They should add it. I understand that for long layouts Pubblisher is better suited to the purpose but with Designers you can make small layouts, tree-folders and it would be very useful to be able to divide the text into columns or let the text blocks continue in other text blocks. Could you add ??

I would like to know how it works in AD! what is the practice to follow in AD, the question concerns "Af Designers" TKS

Hello, How can I scroll the text that does not fit into the text box into a new text box (linked to the first one) ?? As it happens in indesign to understand each other better.

Yes but it would be more logical to have the scroll of the page dragging even beyond the rulers. As it is now you have to be careful in stopping first otherwise you won't move the work table

Ok now it works for me too. yes I extended myself beyond the rulers and the scroll bars. I think it's more intuitive as it works in Adobe. Then oh well they are choices.

that's exactly what I do !!! Except that I don't move. I do not understand! Maybe I have some wrong settings in the preferences ?? Can you send me the screens of your preferences?

you can show me how you do it because I can't do it.

if I have a rectangle in Ai and stretch it, the page scrolls. In AD it doesn't work ... Watch the video. 1 (1).mp4 1 (2).mp4

See that the right export should be done this way, like in the picture! if I have an A4 210 + 297mm document and a 5 mm margin for each side, when I export the document with the crop marks, the cut marks must adapt to the size of the bleed, then export a PDF with a total size of 220x307mm without any further blank space . If the Typographer gives me very precise spaces (table dimension + bleed) I must respect that measurement and not give it a larger PDF which then will have to cut the excess white part, because it will most likely use larger sheets in the machine and therefore others will be placed side by side. pages... In this thing Adobe is wrong too! I never used to add the marks in the PDF export, I always put them by hand or with a JSX plug-in that did this, but still remaining within the limits imposed by the bleed.

Exactly as you say, but an icc color profile different from the color profile in use in the document, it always comes, in any case converted from a source profile to a destination profile, instead the exact procedure is that it must always keep the numeric values and never convert to destination (unless appropriate user requests). In practice, with "no profile embedded" images it behaves well in this way. Now that I remember well "the Adobe theory" there are 3 criteria of choice in color management in Adobe Suite. 1. deactivated 2. maintains the embedded profiles 3. converts into a work profile the right choice is 2, it keeps the numerical values embedded in the color profile of the file. Put simply, consider that photo as if it had no color profile applied and read only the numerical values applied to it. Then in the PDF / jpg export phase etc, you decide to "keep the numerical values" and apply a color profile of your choice, which can be either the work document or other. Practically if I have a fogra39 profile document and I insert images with the fogra39 profile embedded, the numerical values are read in the right way. If I change color profile to the working document and I put fogra27 example and I click Assign, the color profile in fogra27 will change and the numerical values will remain the same as before (and it works well), but if I then have a fogra27 document and insert an image again with different profile eg fogra39, this image will be converted and numeric values will change. In practice, when inserting a photo AD always applies a color conversion in the destination profile !!!! Even if the Convert colors box is not checked in the color preferences. I don't think the color assignment command works well. The color profile of the document should be ASSIGNED to each image inserted, imported, linked to the document so as not to VARY the numerical values even if you work with different embedded color profiles. CAUTION!!! Working appropriately with color management in the press, web, etc. (but above all in the press) is FUNDAMENTAL! Incorrect conversion of numerical values can lead to serious financial damage during printing! A trivial example if a 100% black is converted to a rich black 80-80-30-80 is not the same thing! Not to mention color change in images or dominant etc .. this thing is very delicate Attention Affinity !!! It took me years of study to understand how the "good" thing works in Adobe, now here I find myself headed and above all with the awareness of a wrong management by the software. Affinity we would love to leave Illustrator (because it's shit!) But you have to be able to do it without problems!

OK I am confused. I am confused about the fact of the transparency conversion that in pdf / x 2003 the shadow / transparency areas were rasterized as an image.

I would not be wrong but in Adobe even the shadows remain vector!

I agree with you 100%. A lot of things in AD work great, better a lot better than Ai. But many things and I talk about basic things, they would be improved and revised. Maybe they work but they have a strange logic. 1. Overprint 2. Nero does not overprint by default 3. Color Samples that you can't select more than one, so if I want to convert 50 colors like global color or overprint I have to do them one by one. 4. default global colors 5. viewing of separate color channels and overprinting and spot colors 6. the possibility to export in different color profiles "Maintaining numerical values". Now if I believe a document in fogra39 and I wanted to export a PDF to fogra27, it changes all the numerical values of the colors .. and it's not good!

you're right! PDF / X works overprinting. But to make sure that shadows, transparencies etc. don't rasterize what you need to use PDF / X4? I used PDF 1.6 / 1.7 compatibility in ADOBE and everything worked fine-

I created a black in overprint in AD, I exported the pdf with black overprint why does Acrobat tell me that black is not overprinted? but does it create a hole inside me?

I will read it calmly. But taking a quick look I don't think it's the solution to my problem. (I hope I'm wrong though)