ELinder

Obviously it can also be a global setting for new documents or new elements in a documents, as it already is that. It's set to OFF. When manually toggled it would carry over as it does now with the object, but any new elements should default to ON if we want it. Same with the corner tool, it currently does not carry over when scaling an object. It really should.

Is there a way to globally enable stroke "scale with object" and corner tool settings scaling with object to always be enabled unless turned off? I've never had an occasion where I didn't want both to happen, and it's a pain to redo both when I happen to reuse some previous object. Especially the corner tool settings, I find it almost impossible to exactly recreate the original corner radius setting after I've resized something.

Matt, I'm glad to hear that it's been fixed internally. However, when the list of fixes for the beta versions always include lines like "miscellaneous bug fixes and crash fixes" how are we to know what is or is not covered by that? I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you're going to have beta versions, it needs to be done more systematically. Do you want people to just use the betas and generally see what happens, or do you want them to hammer specific problem areas? The list of specific things that are being worked for each release needs to include the bug numbers. Failing that at least give the registered beta testers the ability to read a bug tracking log to see what's fixed, what's actively being worked on, or still in the queue to be looked at. Erich

Divide is still broken in this release candidate.

No response here either? I fear the fix for this is such a major boolean re-write that they're pushing off a fix until they go to version 2 of the program. Erich

This bug has been previously reported by many people and for a long time. Is it finally going to be addressed in this 1.9 cycle?

Thanks for the confirmation. I've tried multiple ways, and duplicate paths are the most flexible. Erich

Is it not possible to have multiple text sections on the same part of a path? Whenever I start a new text section it automatically goes to the other side of my path. For example, I'm trying to move "England" next to "New Zealand", but when I drag it around it is upside down on the wrong side of the path. If I highlight select it and use the Reverse Text Path tool it reverses everything on that path, not just the highlighted text section. The only way I've been able to figure out how to do this is multiple duplicates of the same path and have each word on a different identical path, or to add a lot of spaces to the text and make it all one huge line on the same path. Erich

I quite like that! I was struggling a bit with keeping the definition of the teeth in the middle from spreading out too much. Erich

Thanks all

Yeah, that could work, and it's better than using an inner glow with the background color since the final background won't be a solid color as it is in this example. I'd still like to know if there's a way to put a gradient transparency across each tooth. Erich

I'm trying to figure out a way to apply a transparency to the edges of cog teeth so they blend together with the background along the long edge of the teeth for each individual tooth. Is there a way to do this? So for the image, I want the brighter teeth to blend into the background so the long edges of each tooth is feathered. cog-tooth-fade-edges.afdesign

The newest Affinity Designer Customer Beta (1.8.3.0 - Release Candidate) fixes lists: - Improved boolean geometry results. Given the multiple different boolean operations that have problem, how about being more specific? Why not actually list the bug numbers so we can know if our problems have been at least looked at? thanks

In 3D apps any kind of boolean operation is messy. That's why there is also some kind of stand alone "merge points" function to merge co-located points. There's also a setting to change how close the points are that you can adjust before doing the operation. I wonder if something like that would be useful for these kinds of problems.

Well darn, my hopes were that the improvements in Booleans included bug 'afd-2042'. Speaking of which, it would be very helpful to include specific bug numbers where appropriate in the list of fixes and improvements for the beta releases. Erich