Andy05

I have still Adobe's old ("pre subscription") creative suite installed—this serves mainly as my format conversion tool. Affinity Photo is doing everything I need for pixel based works, same with Publisher for layouts. Just Designer still lacks some very important essentials for me (like, vector brushes!), but for that I have CorelDraw (I think it's a 2019 SE version - also without subscription) installed. 
The main problem for me is that I will never be able to reinstall my Adobe suite once I change the system or OS. 😕

I think the title of the thread "AI support" will be very misleading for many users, given the panic surrounding AI.
I recommend changing to at least "AI file support".

Thought it would end up like this, two UI posts and the rest off topic, well done.

I come from a 'heavyweight' Adobe InDesign (previously QuarkXpress and Aldus Pagemaker), Illustrator, Photoshop etc etc background and I found it so similar to the other page layout software I was familiar with that it took me literally no more than an hour to understand. Personally I found the transition from QuarkXpress to Adobe InDesign was more difficult and a steeper learning curve. I was able to produce a 64pp book right from the very first time I used Affinity Publisher (and without any need for a manual or tutorial). 
I am really astonished that you can use InDesign "without any problem" but cannot grasp Publisher as I think the two are fairly similar to each other. 

If it's for feedback, why is it in Questions rather than in Feedback and Suggestions?
 

I don't understand your issue here. The PS video does -exactly- the same thing as in AP.
You would already have figured it out in AP, instead of posting  comment after comment.. The examples given should give you enough to start yourself..

AP isn't PS.
Differences can cause confusion and changes in workflow.

Sind deine Maßangaben korrekt? Bei 40 Seiten als Broschüre gedruckt ergeben sich 10 Blatt. Welche Papier- oder Kartonstärke benutzt du, die beim Falten von 10 Blatt einen Unterschied von über 1,7 cm ergibt? – Außerdem würde ich annehmen, dass der innere Abstand/Versatz durch das Falten bei den äußeren Blättern größer ist als bei den mittleren und der Abstand auf dem innersten Blatt (d.h. die Seiten 20, 21) komplett unverändert ist. Also umgekehrt zu deiner Beschreibung.
Einen "automatischen Falzausgleich" gibt es in Affinity nicht. Ich vermute, es wäre eher eine Funktion die beim Ausschießen der Seiten vorgenommen wird, nicht bereits im Layout, zumal dabei das Druckmedium & seine (Papier-)dicke eine entscheidende Rolle spielen, die aber in der Layout-Software nicht berücksichtigt oder eingestellt werden können.
Wie @MikeTO anmerkt, ist im Layout ein ausreichender innerer Rand zu wählen, der oft größer ist als der äußere. Bei hoher Seitenzahl ist außerdem zu berücksichtigen, dass das gebundene Medium im geöffneten Zustand eventuell nicht komplett plan (eben, glatt) aufgeklappt liegt und daher der innere Rand zusätzlich durch die Rundung des gekrümmten Papiers reduziert wird. Das wirkt sich besonders nachteilig aus für Inhalte, die im Layout über den Bund platziert wurden und dann selbst auf dem mittlerem Bogen der Inhalt (z.B. Beschriftung in einer Abbildung) im Bund nicht mehr voll lesbar ist.

Als Ergänzung und um das, was @thomaso sagt, noch einmal hervorzuheben: Unabhängig davon, ob im vorliegenden Fall überhaupt ein so großer Versatz zu erwarten wäre, möchte ich mich ganz allgemein mit sowas im Layout eigentlich nicht herumschlagen. Klar, bei einer Klebebindung ist immer die Rückenbreite zu klären, damit man das bei der Umschlaggestaltung berücksichtigen kann. Aber insbesondere so etwas wie Bundverdrängung wähne ich im Aufgabenbereich der Druckerei – zumal diese entsprechende Software haben müsste, die den Versatz automatisch berechnen und vornehmen kann.
Abgesehen davon hat @thomaso natürlich Recht: Warum sollte bei einer Klebebindung die Bundverdrängung außen überhaupt ins Gewicht fallen?

Wenn der Versatz hier tatsächlich 1,7 cm (nicht mm) beträgt, liegt ein grober Fehler vor, der nicht durch "nicht sauber", also unpräzises Arbeiten beim Schneiden passiert, sondern eine andere Ursache hat. Ich würde von der Druckerei eine Neuproduktion der Auflage oder Rückerstattung des Kaufpreises fordern.
Doch selbst bei 1,7 mm Versatz würde in deinem Fall etwas nicht stimmen, da für Klebebindung die Seiten nicht als gefaltete Bögen sondern als einzelne Blätter im Format der Einzelseiten verwendet werden. Bei exaktem Schneiden haben selbstverständlich alle Blätter den gleichen inneren Abstand. Besonders bei nur 40 Seiten (also 20 Blatt in Klebebindung) ist es problemlos möglich und erwartbar, dass jede eventuelle Größenabweichung deutlich unter 1 mm liegt und weniger visuell als erst durch Nachmessen erkennbar wird.

Uhm. Good question. I thought I've read something like that quite some time ago, because Adobe wants to enforce old users paying for the subscription when they change their system or OS.

Yeah, it seems so:
 

It is hard for me to tell the difference on my 27" iMac & it is important to me to be able to read the layer type of any unnamed layers. Besides, if it was not important to at least some of us, why show any text at all?
All many of us are asking for is higher contrast between UI items & their backgrounds. It does not seem to be a big ask, but the developers have effectively ignored that for many years now, & it is quite frustrating!

This kind of illustrations are originally copperplate engravings. You can mimic this effect in Affinity Photo (google for instructions, most of them are for Photoshop, but the workflow is pretty easy to transfer to Affinity's app).
I hope you don't mind me advertising myself; unfortunately, the free offer expired, but I created some set of assets and macros for this kind of illustrations.
 

That is more of an argument to not include such plugin in Affinity. The video is even making the argument the plugin is better than Adobe's generative fill.
Instead, we just need the scripting/plugins API for Affinity. That is how Alpaca was made available for Photoshop and Stable diffusion for Krita etc. No company can keep up with the pace of AI development. Whatever they include will be obsolete almost by the time they ship it.

Apps: All
Platforms: macOS, Windows and iPad
 
We have now added a spiral tool which is available from the shape tools flyout. This is something we have had many requests for, but also varying requests as to the type of result wanted. For that reason we have tried to make this as flexible as possible, both offering different types of spiral and variables to adjust.
When you create a spiral you will see from the context toolbar the different options available. Here are some examples of what you can create with the tool:
Spiral Type: Linear

Spiral Type: Decaying

Spiral Type: Semi-Circular
This type replicates the way many people have been creating a spiral in Affinity - effectively by joining decreasing semi circular arcs together.  With this type we also offer a counter Semi-circular option which returns the spiral back on itself:

Spiral Type: Fibonacci

Spiral Type: Plotted

 
 

What is so perplexing about this? It was never designed nor intended to be a complete, stand-alone solution for every kind of graphic design work, serious or otherwise.
Its real strength is how it can be combined with the other two Affinity apps to facilitate a wide range of design work, but even so Serif does not nor have they ever claimed the suite to be a complete solution for everything.
What app does that? I don't think Adobe does for PS so why would you expect AP to be any different?

If you're a design enthusiast or hobbyist who can afford only one Affinity app, you should start with Designer. That's Serif's "jack of all trades", and I don't even mean that pejoratively. And – nomen est omen – that's definitely "by design".

Yeah, right. Among others, every now and then I am making money by rebuilding "layouts" made in Photoshop by hobbyist "graphic designers" into proper printable layouts (i.e. PDF) that prepress can actually use… 
Oh, you seem to have some insider knowledge about Serif's intentions that's been hidden from us for so many years! Tell us more, master!  

Photo is intended as an application for working on a single canvas, e.g., a single piece of art you're creating or a photo image. Artboards are for more general design work, and for its intended purposes, Photo does not really need them.

Hi All,
We have just made 2.2 live across all App Stores and our website. As always, the feedback we have received from you all during this beta has been an incredible help in both shaping the new features as well as squashing many bugs!
The build we have released is the same as RC3 (build 2005), meaning for the time being whether you use the latest beta version or switch to using the release version they are the same. If you anticipate taking part in the next beta you may wish to keep your current beta version installed, as this will be updated on auto update when a new beta is available. This will either be a 2.2 patch if we feel one is needed, or moving straight onto a 2.3 beta.
It would be impossible for us to do what we do without your support, and I just wanted to say a huge thanks for everything you have contributed to this release.
All the best,
Ash

I would use a tablet and stylus/pen for that kind of drawing, not a mouse. Technically it can probably be done with a mouse, but I would think it's much harder that way.

The VR headset is yet another failed attempt to create a better Second Life, which came out in 2003. People don't want a heavy and cumbersome headset. They don't want a slow-duration battery. They don't want to feel like weirdos moving their hands (like weirdos), alone, in a room.
But...
... People will definitely want to take advantage of the same tools we use today (content aware filler tool) if they come out with a better engine under the hood (AI-powered content aware filler tool) . These kind of AI-assisted tools will  be extremely useful to any kind of user. The pro, the hobbyist, whatever. 
It's not an "if", in my opinion. It's just a matter of "when" and "how". 
The amount of things you can do with Photoshop Beta, right now, is mind-blowing already. I am not referring to funny/stupid stuff like "Add a flying sausage and a dancing dog to my wedding photo". These are silly experiments. Where the AI-tool shines, is in one of those endless situations where you need to retouch/fill content as fast as you can, without wasting your day (example: cleaning pictures, adding/extending backgrounds areas, filling broken elements, cleaning/improving hair and fur, etc).
Arguing that AI is useless in this scenario is very naive, in my opinion. If you can't see its power (in this specific context) you should watch one of the many YouTube videos and better understand the context, the utility and the real benefits you get from it.
 

Interesting read; is Ai art theft, I would say no, the reason for that is, it doesn't take bits of each reference picture and blend them together to form a whole new image, it holds the picture's as a reference, like a person looks at a painting to work out how it was constructed, it refers to the pictures, it mimics and blends style, colouration, movement of stroke, placement of tone, shading, it looks at the prompt subject and constructs a referenced picture, not bits of pictures based on prompts, but digital strokes to build as a painter would.
Name a corporeal artist that doesn't do the same? All artist's have studied previous art, chosen a style they like and copied the style, created a style based on it, or been influenced in some way to make their style.
Everything we see, feel, smell, hear and taste build our human reference library, Ai only has an "see" that it learns from, so we are ahead of the game/Ai. If we paint an image; in whatever medium we choose, all of the experience's we have had up to that point, go into each stroke of the brush, pen, pencil, pastel etc, this is a subconscious action but nevertheless it influences our movement to create. You can have identical twins that are both artists/creators but they will never be able to make identical art because of their nuanced variation of experiences influence their mind and hand.

I find it odd that people want to rail against AI. How does other technology failing to gain traction prove anything about AI? Why don't we list everything that did work and we now rely on? Mouse input? Graphical user interfaces? Spreadsheets (which the guy didn't even patent because he saw no real demand for it)? Laser printers? Spectrophotometers? Email? Websites? Mobile phones with no keys?!? Heck, the clone-stamp tool?
Productivity is the driving factor in whether something like this succeeds. What is better, a "naïve" user typing "remove the cows from this photo" or having them email the graphics guy, wait a few days for the image, forward the invoice on to accounts, have them process the payment...
I get it, people here have learnt their skills and this technology is a threat to that so whether consciously or subconsciously they will likely be against it.
Things move forward, there are still jobs in the creative field and there always will be. We just won't be clicking pixels with a clone tool or feathering out edges of selections for much longer.