Andy05

I second that. I haven't noticed any change for the forums lately either.

Love it, message is clear, colours are great, also the choice of the font (great mixture between stylish and playful). The only thing I'd change is adding some more consistency to the lines leading to different circles. Sometimes they "don't hit"—just point the direction, sometimes they aim at the centre, sometimes they even "overshot" a circle. I'd target them all alike. Either all like the red one or all ending in a circle, aimed at the same position within (i. e. centre of the circle). The "changed the job"-one can stay as is, of course, as it's not connected to any point which is represented by a circle.

The fonts need to be installed by your operating system. Once done, they'll be available in your apps.

Trovi.com is a known malware/browser hijacking process. I highly doubt that you got it from any Affinity app as there would have been a LOT more reports here already, if that would happen.

I don't think it's a matter of coffee, you couldn't see that it was my draft actually. Reading pcdlib's post, it seems like he initially wanted to upload a different file—his own design based on my suggestion.

Yes, indeed. Although it might be worth keeping it in mind. As even if one doesn't need 100 credits, it might still be worth paying that sum once for a project after all needed images have been gathered together. Depends on the project, of course, if it's worth spending more for it—considering that one invested valuable time into it already.

That's actually my quick'n'dirty design suggestion/mockup I've sent to him. I've noticed the black line too late, it's probably an issue with the conversion of the mockup file (PSD-file). But that black line is not on the original design at all. The OP got the designer file by now to work with.

An alternative might be using online vectorizers/tracers like https://www.vectorizer.io/ Depending on the source file, the results can be quite a good base for finetuning.

It does on windows as far as it affects the units. I just forgot to switch it, but I tested it. Of course, resample mode doesn't allow editing just either width or height, that wouldn't make any sense, would it? Kinda, I guess. Although the advertising might sound different, I think it's rather exaggerated. The main target of the Affinty suite (as the apps are are now) can only be enthusiastic hobbyists and some sectors of professionals. It might be great for artists, but it's simply too wonky for intense print production in so many ways and almost unusable for preparing designs for plotting/engraving/cutting.

Well, it works flawlessly in Windows 10, APh 1.9.2: [EDIT: Mode is "Resample", but works for other modes similarly]

Check the toolbar after selecting the crop tool. You can pick whatever units you like. And Affinity will respect your choice.

Ok, I tried it now as I was curious, what your problem really is. Just to find out your problem doesn't exist at all actually. Seriously, did you even try to use mm/cm or whatever unit you want to use? Of course, it might require some common sense to set the crop tool's units to centimetre in the toolbar in order to crop in centimetres. Do it and be happy. No switching back to pixels whatsoever. You don't even have to prepare the document's units for this. Since you wanted to draw the crop (see your initial complaining post), there's absolutely no difference as to "workload". In both procedures, you have to set the height manually—in photoshop by drawing the crop area, in affinty by resizing the preset height. So why do you even care about the preset height in affinity's setup? Zero / nothing / random number—neither matters nor has any advantages or disadvantages for the procedure. I still don't see what your problem is, honestly.

Of course, you can ignore the height. Just don't enter any number and let be in there whatever is in. You are talking about an unconstrained crop, so why do you even care about the numbers in there? I agree on displaying pixels-only values, tho. That's something, which a user should decide, not the app. But you can enter any other values (like "15 cm"), which—annoyingly—are converted into pixels as you mentioned already. But the whole cropping procedure isn't really affected by that too much. You can move the crop and resize it vertically to any desired size (variable height), maintaining the width you set. I still don't see your problem with creating an unconstrained crop with a given width, except for Affinity's weird choice of insisting in pixels.

For sure. It's so much more than just the warped text. Also, just because it's technically easy to reproduce, that doesn't mean it's easy to invent and create it initially.

Yet, it's a true italic version, not just sheared. Check i. e. the "a", a completely different letter. That's what I meant when I said, there's a ton more edits to a font making an italic style rather than just shearing it.

@iconoclast Check the font originally used. If it's this Serenity, there's almost no overlapping.

There's a link within the wall of text, leading to licensing. But interestingly, it's leading to myfonts (subbrand/service of Monotype), licensing the original Monotype font, but (!) without offering any of the italic versions over there. Which might mean, there is no true italic style for it and the font they offer for download is just a (crappy) sheared version of the original font. Although they mock-up italic styles at myfonts for the URW version. Really weird.

Maybe the crop tool needs some improvements, but I can't see how your example takes that much longer in Affinity. Enter the width and just ignore the height. You can move the crop wherever you want on the image and edit the height by using the appropriate handles for it. Doesn't really take longer than drawing your crop onto the image. Or do I miss something here?

Just a random shot here, did you check the "rasterize nothing" option in the extended export settings/export persona?

The font Impact from URW doesn't have any native italic style. However, there are versions with more variants available. Though, they are not for free (only for personal use—using them on YouTube might not be covered by the license, this needs to be checked first). As an alternative, shearing the text might work. As that's what some apps do in order to "fake" italics to a font which doesn't have any. I'd try that only if I couldn't find any better solution, tho. As a true italic font style usually has a ton more edits rather than just shearing the normal font style.

I hope you don't mind me adding my 2 cents here as well, trying to be constructive. I don't know if it's intentional. But—to me—the grid adds some "behind bars"/"in jail" feeling, strengthened by the big black border surrounding it, which causes some sadness to the looks of it. This feeling is getting even stronger with the latest version as the title "Sentry" is also "behind bars" now. Also, I wouldn't use two different font styles above and below the image. I can't think of a good reason why the text above the image is condensed whereas the text below the image is not. The current choice causes too much "noise", choosing the same font style would add some more balance to the layout. Speaking of balance, the "Veterans Flags Memorial" to the right of the image is either too big/bold or not big enough. As currently it's just distracting, because it's not really clear if it's just a hint (just an explanation of the image to those who don't recognise it—then it needs to be a bit lighter and smaller) or if it's important information in which case it needs more "weight". Lastly, I couldn't find any hint about the logo might not overlap other objects in the guidelines you've provided? In fact, I find countless examples in the web where it was put on top of a flag or maps or even images of all sorts.

Can't add much about the model used here, but I found out that the current Huion tablet drivers in general do an awesome job in conjunction with Affinity apps. No matter if I use low or high precision or windows ink mode settings in Affinity, no matter if I use windows ink, mouse mode, game mode in the driver's setup, it "just works". Even in all weird combinations (windows ink mode in Affinity, but disabled in the driver and vice versa). So, unless they did something weird to your model's driver, you might have to check for @carl123's advice and see if the tablet works for other apps at all.

This. The gradient is working as expected with this settings. It's white to 50% grey, as average of white to black, from 0 to 0, then smoothly grading to 100% black.

I can't reproduce this on my 3-display setup over here (windows 10, laptop display + 2 different external displays, all three Full HD resolution). Colours stay true. But then again, my displays have been colour calibrated via Spyder and using their profiles. What happens, if you move a window with a white page i. e. in MS word (or similar) from one display to the other? Is that staying white on both?

Though you can't see in the demo file, whether he truly did those warp effects within Affinity's apps. On the other side, that Esekiel word/logo in the centre isn't that hard to reproduce without warp tool. Just a couple of nodes which have to be moved simultaneously in a straight vertical line. If you use a waved path as reference in order to align the nodes, it's reproducible within some minutes. (Still takes longer than with a warp tool.)