Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Otto Manuel

Members
  • Posts

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Otto Manuel

  1. Thank you. I thought perhaps it was using the extra resolution even though it rounded off, but the differences seemed so subtle, that I wondered if I administering a placebo effect upon myself. I used the preferences dialog and set the mm to 2 decimal points. This works great, and as you suggested, the strokes that I made previously, and set to various 1/10th increments, now actually display with the values I had entered rather than rounded values. Thank you!
  2. Hi, I am working on a project with a small layout that needs to delivered as vector files. There have been many instances where I would like to use a stroke width thicker than 0.1mm but not as thick as 0.2mm. I can type 0.15 into the stroke width dialog but it seems like my stroke width always rounds to a 1/10th of a millimeter. Have I overlooked a setting that limits the resolution, perhaps a setting that I may change, or is 1/10thmm the finest increment available in Designer? FWIW, if I was delivering a raster image I would just scale up my project and maintain a sort of relativism to the line width, while expecting the line work to blend or interpolate when the raster file was compiled at the final display dimensions, but in this case the project is being sent out as vector so I have been working at the what you see is what you get layout dimension, which matches the intended end use. Thank you for any help you may offer. Thank you!
  3. Hi, The link does not seem to make any mention of the Layer > Geometry > Merge Curves function. FWIW, consideration of the fills is one of the points that made me ask the question. Here is a simple Designer file made for a test: This is the result of selecting all the curves and running a XOR function: This is the result of selecting all the curves and running a Layer > Geometry > Merge Curves function. The placement of the nodes, which are effectively hidden, is markedly different in the two examples, but the shapes and fills seem remarkably similar, so I find it difficult to discern a difference. Hence the question. What am I missing?
  4. Hi, I was trying to learn about Designer Layer > Geometry > Merge Curves and can not figure out how it differs from the XOR function. Thank you.
  5. As an experiment I exported my initial Designer illustration, the one with the overlapping shapes on the layers, as an EPS and opened it in Adobe Illustrator. I selected everything and ran a "Merge" process. The process worked perfectly and there are no phantom artifacts to worry about. It was an eye opener and left me disappointed to think that as much as I love drawing in Designer, I am going to have to continue to depend on Illustrator to do things I can not seem to do in Designer. At least I have a solution at hand. Thank you.
  6. It looks like what I have been asking for is something that equates to Adobe Illustrator's Merge function. I have an Illustrator license but I like drawing in Designer... its a whole lot more fun. Now that I know I should be searching for a "merge" function I have learned that it has been asked about previously but I guess it's not part of a Designer work flow. Maybe?
  7. As an experiment I drew a very simple design in Affinity Designer. The file had 8 layers with shapes that were overlapped. The overlapping was the result of my focus on the display appearance of the illustration rather than the construction of the file. I worked my way through the layer stack by making duplicates of layers to use as "tops" and then running boolean commands. I did this over and over again until I had a file with no overlapping fill areas. During the process I ran into several instances of phantom strokes being left as artifacts which I had to search out and delete before the processes would run. This procedure took about 30 minutes on this very simple illustration. I can not imagine doing this with a complex image. I am not trying to complain about Designer, I am asking for help in learning if there is a best way to accomplish what I am trying to do. Thank you!
  8. I have been trying to work with the Divide process but it just seems to create different considerations for the puzzle, and there is still an enormous amount of hand work. I have been reading a bit about UV printing and I get the impression that the color separations made for these machines and the colorants is much more "hands on" rather than algorithmically processed in a one step RIP automation.
  9. Hi, I want to send off a file to have a "UV" printing service print a design on a small box. The service provider wants a vector file with a specific layer structure, which seems easy enough to conform too, but they also insist that none of the vector shapes overlap each other and advise that I should subtract all the portions of shapes that are overlapped by more prominently placed layers. I am surprised to think that the print machine does not have RIP software to deal with this, but I have very little experience with commercial print technology. I am writing to ask if there is some efficient way to subtract layers into a sort of what you see is what is there conformation? I tried working by hand while digging through the file and identifying pairs of layers to process with the subtract tool. This process presents all sorts of puzzles to solve and it is mind numbing. Am I missing an opportunity to do this more efficiently than a layer by layer process? Thank you!
  10. Hi, I made a few experiments based upon a brand new project that I purposefully used to study the action of layer insertion choices while using the Pen and Pencil tools. What I experienced seemed to highlight a mess of unanticipated behaviors. I thought about making a video demonstration that there are issues for the developers or help support to address, but began to suspect it would be an exercise in frustration as the issues seem so pervasive and obvious that any progress will probably require an all in commitment, on the part of Affinity, to create the functionality that I, probably naively, thought I could expect. For example; When I choose the option to insert a layer above the selected layer, I anticipate that the new layer will be located just above the currently selected layer. It does not seem to work that way. What more can be said? I enjoy drawing in Designer too much to dwell on this issue and will just consider the inability to predict where my layer will be inserted as a sort or quirky mystery. Thank you.
  11. Are there any further tips? I am wondering if I should expect the insertion choice I make to persist or if it is meant to switch back to "Default". Is there a way to set the "Default" to another default?
  12. Thank you. I can't see what I would change in the Assistant Manager that would change anything. What are you suggesting? I use the toolbar buttons, and or the Menu > Layer > Insertion selections to attempt to reset my choice but the choice does not seem to persist for very long. One thing I have just realized is that I tend to use the "Select" tool as a default when I finish drawing a curve and want to deactivate the Pen tool, and that makes me inadvertently change my layer selection even though that is not my intention. If I avoid the Select tool and use something like the Hand tool to prevent the inadvertent drawing of additional curve content then I seem to stay on the layer I thought I was on. Never the less, I have the urge to figure out if can lock the insert preference so it does not continually change status.
  13. Hi, I admit, I had not paid much attention to layer insertion and just lived with moving layers up and down in the stack after I drew a curve. I finally started trying to select an insertion before hand but I can not seem to get a consistent result. I feel like I must be doing something wrong, but now that I have finally decided to try to take care while inserting layers it has become annoying to not be able to do so effectively. How do you use the insertion preferences without having them reset or create insertions in unexpected locations? Thank you! Designer 1.9.2 Win 7 x64
  14. Thanks for confirming that I am not crazy. I guess I do not use Shift+click as often as I use the Ctrl+click or grouping to make selections of multiple layers, but when I do this issue negates any possible convenience the "shift+" command seems intended to provide. This seems like a "feature" that would be fixed in a maintenance release. It was driving me sort of crazy to find that parts of my drawing kept disappearing, which is why I finally paused to figure out what was happening. It is going to drive me even crazier knowing it is a known issue that is not being addressed. Is this an oversight, or is there some user perspective where this functionality is useful? Thank you!
  15. Hi, I was working with Designer on my Windows laptop today and ran into a behavior I have not recognized previously. I am used to selecting multiple layers in the layers list by selecting and highlighting a layer and then using a Shift+ left click on another layer to select all of the layers that span the two selections. I am finding that on many but not all occasions when I perform the Shift+left click the visibility status of the layer switches to invisible. To be clear, I am not clicking within the visibility check box, and the switch does not cycle back and forth. The action is only one way. In other words, I can inadvertently turn off the visibility by clicking anywhere in the layer list slot, but can not turn it back on unless I specifically click within the intended visibility check box. I can reproduce the action, but not 100% of the time. It seems as if there is some sort of timing or time out function where the reaction to the click is either interpreted as a selection cue or rather as a visibility modifier. Am I crazy? has it always been this way, or is it an unintended behavior that I can find a fix for? Thank you. Designer 1.9.2.1035 on Windows 7 x64 laptop running with a Wacom Tablet
  16. It is an old Windows 7 x64 laptop running an i7 2.4Ghz with 16GB Ram. I typically use it with 1.5GB multi layer Photoshop files and often times assemble high res photo stitch .psb composites, that grow to 5GB or more, from which I save as a flattened TIFF for use with Affinity Photo. The laptop is slow but predictable in Photoshop with these large files. When I speak of using Affinity Photo I am simply opening the flattened TIFF, adding a signature layer, and exporting as a distribution ready down sized JPEG. Everything seemed easy and smooth prior to the 1.9 updates. It may be that my system is no longer compatible, or it may be that there are some settings within Affinity Photo that can be adjusted. Just wondering. Thank you.
  17. Hi, I use Designer frequently and love it. I use Photo less often, but especially like to use it as an exporter of large 16bit ProPhotoRGB TIFF photos, which I prepare in Photoshop, to downsized 8bit sRGB JPEGs. I recently downloaded the 1.9.1 and then the 1.9.2 updates and feel as if they are not happy to run on my system. I have an older system, but the earlier versions of Photo worked just fine. I didn't use 1.9.1 much at all, but I am finding that 1.9.2 seems to stall, freeze and choke on just about every operation I do, and all I am doing is opening Tiffs, adding a "signature" layer I made in Designer, and exporting JPEGs. I am wondering if there are any settings that might have been changed or reset or added, that I might adjust to restore my experience to one of appreciation for how nice Affinity Photo has seemed. Thank you! Windows 7 x64
  18. Hi @Mark Ingram, I just had the pleasure of using the change mentioned here and included with the latest Affinity Designer 1.9 public release update. THANK YOU!!
  19. Hi @walt.farrell, Thanks for the suggestion. It seems like this preference selection will be especially helpful for the circumstance I have described. Thank you!.
  20. Hi, I tried the suggestion made above, but continued to stumble upon the unexpected behavior. I have learned what I was doing to cause the issue, and want to share the outcome in case it helps someone in the future. I figured out that when I was using keystrokes to switch between pixel brush, erase and zoom that I would sometimes use the "B" keystroke and instantiate the square pixel brush rather than the round brush. This is easy to see when you are working with large brush sizes, but in the instances where I was causing the confusion I was using a combination of tiny brush sizes and a distant zoom factor. I could not see that I had mistakenly selected the square brush. I would not notice this until I zoomed back in to see the detail, and by that time I had switched from brush to zoom mode so the state of the brush option was not so obvious. It was a very simple mistake on my part, and now I know how to recognize it, correct it, or perhaps just avoid it. Thank you!
  21. Hi @walt.farrell, I had not visited the forum in the past couple weeks and just found your reply. Thank you very much for this suggestion. I will try it and see if that is what has been causing the behavior. Thank you.
  22. Hi, I have been using the symmetry features quite a bit and have stumbled upon an issue, or misunderstanding on my part that I can not figure out. I can start a design using a small round pixel brush and the line work will have nice soft edges that include anti aliasing, but then at some point the brush starts drawing a coarse line with coarse aliasing at the edges. If there is any trend I might recognize it is that this seems to occur when I am zoomed out and trying to draw long smooth lines, and then when I zoom in I notice the marked difference of the character of the line work. I use the B and E keystrokes often as I draw the design, but other wise the brush settings would seem to be unchanged even though the character of the resulting line work becomes remarkably different. A typical brush setting might be something like width 6 - opacity 100% - flow 100% - hardness 60% - Stabilizer ON - Window 50 - Symmetry ON - Symmetry Value = 6 - Mirror ON - Lock ON Some how after keying back and forth between the Eraser and the Brush a few times, and zooming in and out to create long or short lines, and perhaps changing the Symmetry Value, the brush produces a crude hard edge line. I can't figure out how to reproduce the behavior, but it has been occurring to often for me to ignore. What might I be doing wrong to cause this? Thank you! Affinity Designer 1.8.5.703 on Win 7 x64
  23. Hi, I was working on a complex curve today. It was hand draw lettering that was collapsed to a single layer/curve. I assumed it would be easy to ctrl/drag some of the nodes, which described one of the letter characters, to make a copy of the character, but this did not work. I tried it with and without the "Transform Mode" activated. It was not a big deal I got what I needed by duplicating the curve with all the characters and deleting a bunch of redundant stuff. I could have worked by separating the curves, but that caused the "openings", like the hole in "O" to fill, which would have introduced more clean up work with boolean functions, so I choose not to use that method. This got me wondering, is there actually a way to copy a subset collection of nodes within a curve? Have I missed something? Is there an easy way to do this? Thank you!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.