Andy05

In a professional workflow, one usually paints in the hair manually after masking until it looks natural (which requires some experience, skill and time). You can use dedicated hair brushes for this (from 1 single hair to a whole bunch of them), which can be found in the web or which you could create yourself.

True, I also use both (depending on the source). The problem with bilateral blur is that in some cases, there might appear some miscolouring around some edges. I prefer true colours over slightly better preserved edges.

Maybe not the oldest versions. But you can find a valid CorelDraw license (from a trustworthy seller, not some random Russian or private seller) with a 50ish Euro price tag on it, which will work with the current version of Windows 10 (not sure about 11, neither about Mac operating systems, can't make any statement about this).

You can buy a licence for a dated Corel version, which was released within the last 10-15 years, for less than Affiiniy's costs and you'll get the feature for a comparable price. So, the price argument is a bit wonky.

Yes, as a bonus. Not as something, which should be seen as a requirement of a data merge function in a layout software. Indeed. Also one of the most useful, when creating catalogues or brochures for clients, which have a shared layouts for their article groups.

LOL You're a true Einstein, aren't you? You expect a low budget design app to handle such a specialised task like yours, which even other high budget apps can't do without plugins/extensions, which are dedicated to deal with such tasks? Seriously, if you're supposed to transport 30t of goods from A to B, would you expect your low budged street car to do this job, because it "can transport" stuff? Or would you rather take a vehicle dedicated to transport heavy goods, like a huge truck? Again, data merge in a design app is meant to add prepared data into a template. Your task is not "data merging" at all, you request for "data editing/manipulating, then merge). Different task, wrong app. And obviously, you can't do that in other apps either without additional tools. So what? I really don't get why you're trying to convince me that Publisher isn't the right app for doing such complex and specialised data merge tasks. That's what I was saying since this discussion started. You rather proved me right all the time. What? Where did I say, I'd do such tasks in Publisher at all? To the contrary, I said, Publisher's data merge is NOT meant for such tasks. True. Since you obviously have some experience, I wonder if latter part applies to you as you did nothing but adding more arguments to support my statement. Again, in case you still have issues to understand: "Publisher is not meant to be a tool for editing/manipulating data for data merge." Neither for simple tasks nor for complex tasks like in your example.

Yes, really. Affinity Publisher is a layout/design app. If you need to manipulate data which you want to merge into your layout, do it with a dedicated app. A data merge option in a layout app is meant to insert data—not to edit, evaluate or manipulate it. Just because other developers try to produce overloaded "can-all-do-all"-apps, it doesn't mean that that's the correct way to go.

That's actually the approach, which makes most sense. Affinity Publisher isn't meant to do decisions about what to display or what not in case of data merge. It should be the task for the app which produces the data to decide.

Huh? Designer neither is a CAD app nor a dedicated technical drawing vector tool, but a graphic designing app. That's like saying you'd like to participate with a generic street car in a Formula 1 race. "Hey, it's 2021 and that's a car, it should be able to partake, shouldn't it?" For such a race, use a F1 car. And for specialised tasks (like CAD or tecnical drawing), use dedicated apps. Not a designing app which might be used as a workaround for such tasks. Sure, some CAD features would be nice to have, but assuming they belong into a graphic design app is just ridiculous.

I assume that this is intentional. Some features need to be in one (or two) of Affinity's apps only, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense buying all of them, if you have access to all features in one app and its personas.

You could ask your printing service, a lot of them provide a colour profile (sometimes even tweaked ones, optimised for their workflow). Or download a generic ICC profile (e. g. https://www.color.org/registry/Uncoated_Fogra47L_VIGC_260.xalter). Once installed in your system, it should be available in Affinity's apps, too.

The whole illustration (it's a bit too complicated for working as a logo for my liking) is more like a designer's nightmare. This would be my suggestion in order to make it as pleasing to the eye as possible whilst maintaining legibility and the 45° angle of the hashtag. logo without. name.afdesign

And if you need to switch the apps pretty often, you might want to assign shortcuts to those functions. I've bound the same keys to identical functions in all apps, this is very convenient. So I just have to press a modifier key (like CTRL or ALT) plus F9 and it'll open the current document in the other app. (E. g. CTRL+F9 opens Designer from within either Photo or Publisher or ALT+F9 will open Publisher). I haven't used the personas in either app since I've got this setup.

Seriously, tho. The whole post of mine stated that Remini is creating new faces rather than restoring oftentimes, furthermore I wrote the completely untouched result might give a starting point. So, you you've posted your "observation" of exactly those flaws which I already pointed at? Create a mask and/or work with liquifiy filters and you might get a better result than in some of those other oversharpened and miscoloured attempts—it might even take less time. As @Ron P. already said correctly, a professional re-toucher would probably reject this job. Or would take a lot of money, as a restoration of this image would need a lot of work and manual recreation or replacement of existing features in this photo. The very low resolution of the source image adds yet another point to the problems. BTW: When using the clarity filter (not just on this image), try setting its blend mode to "lumiosity", usually this causes less wrong colouring.

*sigh* What exactly was unclear when I wrote "might work as a starting point?

I know, AI enhancement is the devil, but here and there it might give a good starting point for manual editing... This was done by the "infamous" Remini App, which is known for oftentimes creating completely weird new faces instead of restoring the existing ones. Also, it's focused mainly on face enhancement. Yet, as said, sometimes it might work as a starting point for more (absolutely nothing has been done here additionally, the image just got sent through Remini app via BlueStacks Android emulator on PC):

For German, it's the opposite. Automatic spellchecking is quite easy, but I've yet to see a working German grammar correction. Fortunately, latter is usually disabled by default in most apps, so it's not annoying me with false findings.

You mean something like a snapshot?

Before/after what? Last step? All steps, which have been done with the tool last used? All steps done since the image was loaded? As for latter, use ALT/Option click on the layer with the original image on it (it's always a good idea to keep a copy of an image untouched on a layer). This will show only that original image, clicking outside will show the active edits. For one or more steps in a non-destructive workflow (which should be aimed for in general), it should be possible to see the before/after edits by just disabling/enabling a layer or multiple (grouped) layers.

Whilst I appreciate that the developers try to take care of performance and stability issues with each update of the Affinity suite, I completely agree about adding new "fancy stuff" rather than implementing missing essentials for a design suite. From a marketing prospective, astrophotography might have been a useful step. But in my point of view, this belongs to an app, which is dedicated to this theme. I still wonder, if the "astro feature(s)" attracted more paying users than things like often requested direct features which currently require more or less excessive workarounds (if doable at all) would do. Or things like e. g. true vector brushes, non-destructive envelope warping for both vectors and pixels which have been requested for years. On top of this, some issues exist for years now, which I honestly cannot understand. A recent example, which I stumbled across again just yesterday: Seriously, one might expect such lack of basics in an app from a new company, but here? I've seen that for some users the question arises here and there, whether the developers have any real designers among their team or if they just know the technical aspects of programming. And I have to agree. Oftentimes it seems like the devs very well know how to code a design suite, but lack the experience of the designing market itself. That said, I still prefer Affinity over other apps and I can do 80-90% of my jobs with it. But there are still so many trivialities to find workarounds for most of the time.

I hope not! I rather hope for some of the essential features of a design suite which have been requested for years will find their way into V2. There are specialised CAD applications out there available. Affinity apps' job would rather be "fine tuning" or "pretty-fying" the works you did in a CAD app.

Indeed, it's way older than that. Source: https://www.bertholdtypes.com/font/akzidenz-grotesk/proplus/

That's not how a mockup works. As you'll have to do this with every single image over and over and over again. You're creating a single image, not a mockup template. A mockup is a prepared template, which lets you just drop another image/logo/motive into and all effects (inclusive warp distortions) will be applied without fiddling anew with them. Just as an example: You've sent your "mockup" to a client. He tells you something like this "No, that font is too playful to represent our business. Could you please show me the cup with font XXXX?". And now? Yes, you have to recreate all the steps you did for the image again. Might be not much in this case, but imagine an image to showcase your designed pattern on some fabric, with loads of wavy distortions in it. In a mockup template, you'd just change the font for your image or the pattern for the example below. It's getting worse, the more objects and distortions you have within the same document or the more complex they are.

Simple answer: No. There are countless requests for non-destructive warp functions for several years now, but neither of the Affinity apps provide any. And also, no, Serif isn't telling us about when or if a feature will get implemented. (The beta versions might be seen as an exception to this as you can test the new features for the upcoming app update, if there will be any.)

Sorry, that's not helpful in your case (as it's not useful in your publication)—but that's a fancy looking effect which happened there. I'm sure quite some designers, who do e. g. posters or flyers would like to have an easy way to produce such "glitch" on purpose.