Andy05

Hence my comment that the OP might want to keep a copy of the layers as backup.

It also works on groups. In @globso's case, the two pixel layers need to be grouped first (creating a group within the parent group). Keep in mind, that warp is a destructive feature and will create a merged pixel layer of the warped layers, so you might want to copy the pixel layers first in order to keep some backups.

Very interesting link! Although I haven't used any Type 1 fonts for ages, I didn't know about this part, which is quite drastic for some old files' backup in their original file format: Thanks for bumping this issue, time to convert some old works into PDF in order to keep at least some "kind-of-editable" format of them.

Did you do the scan yourself? If so, it might help scanning the image four times, rotated by 90° each time. Then merge the stack of images. This might give an easier starting point for editing as the light on the "bumps" will be from different angles with each scan rather than fiddling with the FFT denoise filter in first place.

I usually ask them a question in return: "If you hire a worker to fix things in your house, do you insist that he uses the brand of tools you like most? Or do you think he's enough of an expert to know which tools work best for him?"

That's actually not a problem at all. If you're hobbyist, you need to check if the apps are worth their money (also, if they have all features you need) and whether you'd like to spend time with them. If you're a professional and you can't do your job with the apps in their current state, the solution is the same, just more obvious -> find an alternative app, which fulfils all your needs.

There's much more when it comes to creating a good font/typeface rather than just scanning/creating simple letters. You might want to prepare all characters in designer as vector objects. And for creating a font, there are dedicated apps for this. Some are even open source like Birdfont or FontFord.

My guess is that this font's "fill" is just the black outline/shadows. So it's impossible to assign any colour to the white areas (because they are actually transparent) unless you place some matching shapes underneath the text with the desired fill colour.

True. But the question for some people might be: Will the changes and new features of all of the three apps introduced with V2 make it worth upgrading all of them? A discount on all three apps as a bundle might make the choice easier for some.

That's exactly what I'd do. Just enough of a change, so it's not the original illustration anymore. Or something like @firstdefence's example. Edit: @carl123's example would also work as it's neither a logo nor a trademark rather than an illustration. Publishing something like that is covered by the license.

Still, my statement is valid: Source. The licence allows the use of the illustration as such on websites etc. Using stock arts for logo/trademark design is usually not allowed.

Careful with creating a logo with illustrations from stock pages! Unless heavily changed (like: original's not recognisable anymore), most stock pages don't allow the use for logo design nor for creating merch. The illustration you used seems to be sold by iStock. Standard license: Source I haven't checked the extended license, they might provide what you need. If your client is using your design just for printing a couple of T-Shirts for themselves and some friends, there won't be a problem ("No plaintiff, no judge."). But if they want to use it on a bigger scale, it might become a problem at some point.

Das wäre meiner Meinung nach so ziemlich das Schlimmste, was Serif machen könnte. Wenn man mal die Beiträge in diesen Foren über ein paar Jahre verfolgt hat, weiß man, dass daraus sicherlich sofort die Erwartungshaltung "kommt in 1-2 Monaten als stable Release" entstehen würde.

I really don't get what you thought. Pay once and get all new apps forever? Where did you get that idea? "Hey! I bought a brand new Ford! Now, they are telling me, that there will be new models next year with some better features! Nobody told me that Ford would develop new cars and I'd have to pay for them again! Fraud!!!1!!"

Yes, USB (3.x) connected 2 TB Seagate conventional HDD (no SSD) in a standard external casing. Works without issues when copying stuff from and onto it, even huge files. Speed and error diagnose programs don't show any problems, even when run over night. Short, expensive/quality cables (no cheap $1 china USB connection cables with 10ft+ length).

Well, good for you then. I lost several hours of work when using an external USB drive in the beginning. Maybe there haven't been reports in these fora (haven't checked), but I had quite some users reporting corrupt files with USB drives at facebook or reddit.

Yes, opening and saving files from/to external drives is possible. But I'd strongly recommend, that you don't work on files which are stored on external drives. There are numerous reports in these fora about lost and/or broken files due to the kind-of incremental saving feature of the Affinity apps.

I used to work with a 1060 (PLUS, if my memory serves right). At least in Windows 10, the pressure sensitivity worked. But only with one specific setting. I can't remember, which one it was, but you need to match the settings (Windows Ink/low or high precision) in the tablet's driver as well as in the Affinity app's settings. Also, these reset every once in a blue moon in a non-reproducible manner, so you might have to check them again, if pen pressure stops working again.

It's actually surprisingly lightweight on the system—considering this app's features. As for experience with it, see my previous post (like @walt.farrell mentioned).

Since you're using FontBa.se, it's quite easy. Firstly, I'd start with organising the fonts, if not done yet. Organise them into separate folders like "Serif", "Sans-Serif", "Gothic", "Display", "Handwritten" etc. Add those folders to auto watch in Fontbase. An incredibly powerful feature, it'll add fonts automatically to the list if you copy them into the folders. No need for manual scanning for new fonts anymore... These steps are not really necessary, but they will make the search for fonts faster (and font handling less confusing in general). Now, when you open a document in Publisher, it'll tell you, which fonts are missing. Fontbase has a quite good search feature. Search for the font (top search bar) and activate it. Search for the next font, activate. Rinse and repeat until you've activated all fonts. Publisher will replace the fonts automatically after you've activated them! You don't need to assign them manually. At least it does so when running Windows (10). Once you're done with the document, deactivate the fonts in fontbase again. This way, you'll run your OS with only as little fonts as needed for daily use.

That's probably similar to Serif's definition of "vector" brushes.

In addition to the two examples above, I'd start with some different approach. With this method, the original shapes, lines and shadows are maintained. Here's a (very!) quickly done low-res example. But with some fine-tuning it should provide the wanted results. These are the steps used (every step gets added as a layer above the previous one, all of them applied to the masked object): duplicate the image mask the object desaturate the masked object (I used HSL, but B/W would work as well, maybe even better, depending on the motive) add a curve like shown in my example, go wild with the nodes! Add a gradient map (here's where you pick your colours, the more "rainbow-ish", the better). In this case, I added a gaussian blur (was needed due to low res source) set the masked object's blend mode to a setting, which will blend the colours to the original underneath (e. g. overlay)

Again, I don't disagree with you about the missing feature. But copypasting the objects into e. g. inkscape, do the perspective distortions, copypasting back into Affinity Designer and export (as 100% true vector) might have taken just a couple of minutes. The conversation with your clients, stating that you couldn't do it, followed by (I assume) more back and forth conversation surely took more time. I still can't see the point you're trying to make. The turnaround time of the professional approach (using tools, which include your features) would have been the quick way, wouldn't it? What I was complaining about was the exaggerated drama you tried to make about the missing feature.

You stated: So, IF you didn't turn down the job, why did you tell such nonsense to your clients? Swear silently about the missing features in your office, but don't tell the client "I can't provide that, 'cause my app won't let me do it!". Again, your whining initial post doesn't make sense. Yes, vector warp should be a feature of Affinity apps. Yes, you can complain about this. But seriously, don't try to argue with "I couldn't do my job properly *sniff*." And yes, that made you look very, very amateurish. You claimed that Affinity needs to know why this feature is important. So, your argument is, that a professional is losing jobs because of this? Really? You just could have stated that you needed to use a different app in order to fulfil your client's task. That'd have been professional. "I had to explain to my client, that I can't do it with my favourite app!" was an amateur's version. That's all.

Seriously? You provided a tearful scenario; why you, as a "professional", had to turn down a client's job, because you couldn't fulfil it with your favourite app. Next time, less drama, please. We both agree, that the vector warp is a sorely missing feature in affinity apps. But if you really can't cope with this problem when dealing with clients, you might have to rethink about your "professional" status, really.