Andy05

And why is this relevant here? Affinity apps (and CorelDraw) support colour profiles. So, if you have a document with RGB profile active, the CMYK export (as EPS) will be wonky (as you figured out yourself). Therefore, it is important, that the document has a CMYK colour profile, if you want to export it as EPS with correct CMYK values in it. It's completely irrelevant that EPS doesn't support colour profiles. But it get's the CMYK values from the exporting app, hence use the colour profile which you want to use for print when creating a document.

How can that help? If you isolate your subject, you can't see the objects which it is placed onto. So you don't know where to move or how to distort it in order to place it correctly within the mockup. Even editing might be tricky, as lots of edits are usually done on separate layers, not on the embedded object (formerly photoshop's smart object).

No. [ALT]+click on a layer just isolates it(s view), basically temporarily blending out all other layers.. But that won't let you edit the embedded document (that's what Affinity converts photoshop's smart objects into). In order to use such mockups, you'll have to edit the embedded document, not the layer in the mockup. [EDIT, to clarify my statement above]: Check it out with the file which @ONiel attached to his post above. If you use your method, you'll see the distorted and edited layer. Replacing that with an own motive would basically be the same work as creating such 3D mockups from scratch yourself. Double click on the layer, labelled "REPLACE ME" and you have new tab with a flat, plain "from above", 2D sheet, which you could put your motive onto. Saving this new tab will update the mockup with all edits (distortions, colour effects and what not else).

Check the document's colour profile, if it's set to a CMYK one. If I set it e. g. to "ISO Coaded V2 300% (ECI)", Designer's exported object in CMYK 0,0,0,10 stay 0,0,0,10 in CorelDraw. Ask your printing service which CMYK profile they would prefer. Most companies even provide colour profiles, which you could import into the Affinity apps.

Try to double-click on the icon of the layer, which is labelled "REPLACE ME". Make sure, you double click only on exact this layer, none of its (probably available) modification layers. This usually open a new tab with the mockup's current motive which you could replace with your own.

For the 3D-mockup, I wouldn't reinvent the wheel in this case. There are a tons of good (photoshop) mockups for this motive available. Fully customisable and quite a bunch of them for free. Since the display is flat, those mockups should work in Affinity as there shouldn't be any warping involved. Affinity can't render photoshop mockups which include warped (smart)objects.

Right? I feel you, when I want to post Serif's links here. It's really an adventure to find a URL of some of Serif's pages in English, if that's not the main language in your browser's setup (for me it's German). At least with the help pages it's possible by switching the language in the drop down field to the bottom left side. But when you want to link i. e. to any of the apps' specs or—as an example for what I tried to find a while ago—the link to the 50% off promo when it was still running, it's quite a task. Sometimes manually replacing the /de/ in the URL with /en-gb/ works, sometimes not as it's redirecting you to your language's version. Or you switch the browser's language, use a proxy etc... In other words: You need a workaround for posting Serif's English URLs, if you use a different language. Not that we're not used to work with workarounds with Serif's apps as well.

Like @LibreTraining asked, it might be interesting which fonts cause issues. As just because other apps and programs provide bold and italic variants for them, those might be fake. IIRC Word (at least when I used it ages ago) just added an outline or skewed a font in order to provide a "bold" and "italic" variant of a font even if the font doesn't naturally provide either. (Which always has been a nightmare for any font designer, as there's much more to create a bold and/or italic variant than just adding an outline or skew.)

Reminded by the most recent tutorial by PixImperfect, I want to share an old macro of mine with the community, which does exactly what he's showcasing in this video. I created it quite a while ago—when I first heard of this method. In order to adjust the sharpening of the image, you'll have to adjust the setting for the live Gaussian blur filter. (Yes, that's sharpening by adding more blur.) For the best output, you might also have to edit the "sharpening" group's opacity. Depending on your motive, this method can provide better results than pre-installed sharpness/clarity filters or methods using frequency separation. And it's completely non-destructive. So, might be worth a try. blursharpening.afmacro

I guess you want to use this as a monochrome icon of some sorts? If so, I'd combine (boolean function "add") the three sides of the parcel. Then I'd add a stroke to the (blue) band on top of the parcel, expand this stroke. Lastly use another boolean function, this time "substract" on band and (combined) parcel. The result would be something like this: I attached the Affinity Designer file for you to modify it to your liking. box.afdesign

Ignore my stupid post, I misread something. Just to clarify one thing, I didn't try to criticise you, but the Affinity's hyphenation behaviour (which truly isn't great at all).

[EDIT: I misread something, which I noticed after re-reading Legarto's previous comment and his reply. Sorry.]

As far as it might be useful in order to find out what brush settings have been used exactly, I guess storing each change of size and—even worse—pressure would be way too much. Especially pressure can vary hundreds of times in a single stroke. Just imagine painting something like hair onto an object with a pressure sensitive brush. Hundreds of strokes within just a couple of minutes, multiplied by probably dozens of pressure changes each strike... Your idea with a graph might work for size, opacity and such features (please, as a feature which one can turn off in the settings as this might cause even more lagging when drawing). But I can't think of any viable solution for storing altering pressure applied for each stroke as well.

Yeah, I thought of basically storing just the "initial (modified) brush". Ignoring on-the-fly modifications like brush size etc., which you might be doing by shortcuts whilst drawing. All the other extended features (like jitter, distance and suchlike) should be stored. Because size, opacity and those basic settings, which one usually changes constantly during drawing shouldn't create a new "last used brush" each time. If that's something one would constantly need to have access to, there probably should be a quick-add button/icon/shortcut or something like that to add the current brush inclusive size and opacity etc. to the list. But having access to the last 5-10 brushes, inclusive all the extended settings you may or may have not modified when you started painting (even with a standard opacity and size) would help a lot already. Edit: I used the term "swatches" in my first example only as a comparable feature for colours. Of course, I wouldn't want to see the last used brushes in such a tiny square/icon.

That's nothing which needs to be stored with the brush setup/settings, tho. Only the setting about "pressure sensitivity yes/no". The on-the-fly dynamics caused by pressure would still apply to the brush, you don't change the brush settings either whilst using a dynamic (pressure sensitive) brush. That's usually a setting you just do once before you start using the brush.

I'd prefer a system comparable to the colour swatches, which show the "last XX used colours" in the current session. So some kind of "swatches", representing the "last XX brushes used", inclusive ALL modifications per brush used would be a nice have-to. Might even come as a dynamic brush category (last brushes used) at the very top of the drop down list.

Check if there aren't any "FX" settings left for the copied layer. If you follow along the tutorial, you'll get a pixel layer with all FX effects rasterized, no more FX layers should be active. You can edit and mask the pixel layer without the FX affecting it. I attached the macro, which works as showcased in the video. FX2pixelLayer.afmacro

See any amount >0 as a tip, a token of gratitude. At gumroad, you can still enter "0" as price you want to pay in order to get the plugin for free, if it's offered for free.

I've attached the Affinity Photo file, which shows the things I did in order to achieve what you're searching for. It's more or less a "quick'n'dirty" edit as the image was very low resolution. But the steps are pretty much the same, just need a bit better fine-tuning (i. e. lighting, font choice etc.) for a realistic result. Seatle.afphoto

I wonder if this (or disabling a dedicated GFX card in order to use the in-CPU graphic processor) is actually counterproductive. Maybe I'm not stressing the hardware acceleration enough, but I can't see that much of a benefit of it in contrast to having a (in my case) nVidia GeForce GTX 1080 working instead of the intel CPU built-in graphic processor. Even with hardware acceleration turned on on latter, it's still countless times slower than a "non hardware accelerated" 1080. I would think the same applies to any halfway decent AMD GFX combo.

Well, the development of an app costs money as does maintaining a service like Unsplash. So I can understand that they try to earn money. As for Unsplash, I'm a bit torn with this, tho. Their service relies on (free) submissions from photographers. Unless they'll start paying back some money to the contributing photographers, I guess the overall quality of the offered images will decrease. Because I think that most people like to share their images for free, only if others can get them gratis, too. But if a business starts making money of their free works...?

Wouldn't the feature ">Edit>Paste without format" or ">Edit>Paste Special... / Unicode Text" in publisher be quicker as it should provide the same results?

So there it is... another step of monetising Unsplash. To be honest, I expected this and many more "premium" (aka "pay to get") features following bit by bit since I read about Getty Images acquired Unsplash.

Well, I still think this will be the option in the future. I don't see those new features integrated into any V1.x. I rather see them coming with V2.x, which will be a paid upgrade of the apps.

As zayca explained, it's a tool which basically allows you a shortcut way for several boolean cuts. But I disagree, that that's a "must have" for professionals. Vector warping functions have been around for decades in most vector apps since their first version and professionals were able to save a lot of time as this is a feature which is still in use (admittedly less than some years ago, tho). Reproducing the result manually is demanding time and skills. But the shape-builder is relatively new—IIRC it was introduced in Illustrator CS5 in 2010ish—and in contrast to a vector-warp (preferably non-destructive!) it's something which isn't saving that much time in comparison to applying boolean functions. The shape-builder is more a tool for convenience and actually more helpful for enthusiastic amateurs rather than professional designers. That's why Adobe introduced it as a "new and fresh" feature that late into their suite and not decades ago along with i. e. warping. That's not a matter of complexity to program such tool. There simply wasn't much demand for it, but it sounded good in advertising as a fresh new feature back then for the next version of the CS. And yes, it is more convenient than fiddling with boolean functions, if you don't know how to work with latter. But it's far from being an essential function of a vector app.