justinpbrown71

I placed an image on a document, a b&w picture on a white background. I then cut out the b&w picture, inverting, then deleting the white background. I am left with the b&w picture suspended within a larger alpha space, where the white background used to be. How do I crop the alpha space to the size of the b&w picture? I want to be able to snap the picture to other objects, but of course it is surrounded by the alpha space, the frame of which will be recognised as the snapping boundary. I have tried using the crop tool to crop the document, but it doesn't crop the layer the picture is on. Which tool or process is best for this job? Thanks

I have colour-flooded an object, but when I click the cross of the colour on it, in preparation to add that colour to another object, I discover that the colour picker selects different variations of the colour depending on where on the object I click. The colour selection seems to be random. So currently I am manually noting the hex code for colours I am applying to objects in case I want to re-apply those colours to new objects I create further into my design development. Does the colour picker have a default setting that selects variants of an object colour. but not the exact colour itself? Thank you.

In practice my above theory doesn't solve the issue. I have discovered that even though I applied a single colour to the first object, if I select that colour on the object with the colour picker tool, a different hex code variation of that colour is applied in the colour module, top right. In fact if I click with the picker cross on different areas of the object's colour, different hex codes & colours show in the colour module; all slight variations of the same hue. So the issue may be with the flood tool applying seemingly random slight variations of the original colour onto the object, even though to the eye the colour looks consistent. And the more I look at the objects the more they all look slightly different even though they've been flooded with the same original colour. Confused.

I think I might have discovered the issue. The colour picker doesn't include the opacity level of the original setting. So when the picked colour is applied to the new object & the opacity is set the same, it re-applies opacity setting, effectively percentage multiplying the opacity. This means the opacity setting is applied twice. So, when applying a picked colour (that was applied as an original non-picked colour) which had opacity set other than to 100%, to a new object, it is necessary to reset the opacity of the picked colour to 100% before applying.

I flooded several objects with different colours. After that I did other work to my composition & later decided I wanted another object coloured the same as the first object I had colour flooded. So I used the picker to select the colour of the first object, then used the flood tool on the new object, but the colour flooded was different; it was the same hue, but much paler. In order to get it to the saturation of the first colour I would have to apply the flood 4 or 5 times. Why is this, & how can I achieve my aim? Thank you.

MEB, thanks for indicating the existence of the Transform Panel. With some figure tinkering there I have solved my joint lines issues. Thank you very much for your time!

On closer inspection I have noticed that the lines have not gone. The first design I tried they just weren't so visible, but on a 2nd design I just made they are obvious, I have tried moving the pixel value to 3 & to 6, but get the same result. It's also strange that one design I made with the same process has come out okay, (a 24 image construction, though others with 24 have not), before I altered the pixel value.

Great! That solved my issue thanks MEB. What actually changes by adjusting that setting? (I set pixels to 2).

I am snapping into alignment & merging photo images. But there are visible 'white' (are they transparency or pixels?) joint lines between what were the individual images before they were merged. (I am performing multiple merges as explained below). Is this a specificly set width of pixels? Is there a way to join images without leaving a visible joint. I am beginning with an A0 print preset & 1 square photo image. I create 3 copies of the photo image & create a larger square from them, snapping them together (red & green lines indicating h & v alignment) & merging visible. I repeat this process with the new square, & finally create the last merge from 6 copies of this final created square. The resulting image comprises 96 of the original image. The image created will be used for a pattern to be printed on cloth, & of course it's not suitable for the joint lines to be seen.

I now see the where the problem occurs. I was reducing the opacity with the colour opacity slider, not with the layer opacity slider. That makes all the difference. Again, many thanks for your patience & assistance Old Bruce 😀

Old Bruce, firstly I apologise. I thought the 87s.afdesign was my original file & only just opened it. I should've been more observant of the file name, as I am using APhoto, not Design, simply because I am working with photographs only, besides this logo. And I thought the logo would be simple to create in APhoto, the software seeming to have many of the same toos. So the result in your previous reply, without the lines is what I would like to achieve. "I need to know that what you want is the blue colour but not the dark blue at the intersections." - Correct "You want the 87S to be transparent." - Correct So your example on the right is perfect. Is then there a difference between how APhoto & ADesigner produce when applying the same process? Or have you executed a different procedure to me? Please can you run me through exactly what you did? I created the 3 characters on a transparent preset, moved them into position, overlapping, grouped them, added colour & reduced opacity. But your examples do not show the overlap when the opacity is reduced. Many thanks, I really appreciate your time.

Sorry, I don't uderstand. Whether the characters are grouped or not the same result occurs. Is there something fundamental I am missing here?

This is not what I want. I want the opacity to be reduced, not at 100%. But when I reduce the opacity there are overlapped areas where the opacity is doubled up due to there being parts of two characters occpuying the same space. Here is what I have, but I desire this opacity unifomed, without having the overlaps more opaque. Also I would like to have this as a template, or saved as an AFile so I can modify the colour & size for future use.

Because I reversed the procedure back to the original grouping of the characters. Obviously it was not the correct way to proceed to achieve my goal.

This did not work Alfred. After ungrouping, I saw the opacity was already at 100, & when I regrouped & reduced it I got the same result.

Hi Ray, thanks for your response. I have ungrouped, convereted the characters to curves, 'added' them to each other (the Boolean operation which seemed the most appropriate) & selected a colour, but the holes of the figure 8 became filled with colour. And even though the inner lines of the holes of the figure 8 are highlighted, if the selection brush is chosen to remove them, the highlighted lines disappear. This is not ideal if I have to measure & cut holes from the figure 8 everytime I need to change the colour of the logo to apply to a new design.

I have created 3 individual characters which I want to join, overlapping a little, to form a logo. I have positioned the 3 characters vertically with the required overlap of each, chosen a font, aligned the characters & grouped the 3 layers. (I want to be able to save this & be able to modify its colour for when I add it to different designs). When I have coloured the logo & reduced the opacity to the desired value, the double colour density is visible where the characters overlap, which I don't want. What's the best way to create a single logo from the currently 3 grouped characters, & be able to save it for future colour & size modification, & not get the double colour density occurring? Thanks.

AH, something simple. That's a relief. Again, thanks for your assistance Old Bruce. It's a steep learning curve, but little by little I'm progressing.

I have project to crop & arrange several images onto one document. I began by choosing an A4 transparent preset (the design is for a t-shirt, so I thought this a practical choice. I usually, instead, just open the image I want to work on, not using the presets, as, up until now, I've only ever worked on single image projects. I'm still unsure as to what qualities the different presets offer as far as to what type of project they're suitable for). I then placed a jpg image as a layer onto the A4 doc. I then duplicated the image layer to cut away the background of the subject in the image. (I am duplicating an image everytime I do something new to it, as I don't know which operations are destructive & which are not). I then placed a 2nd image onto the project, in preparation to also remove its subject from its background. I unchecked the 2 layers of the first image, expecting to be able to work solely on the new image. But I still see the pixel selection of the cut out background of the first image & it is still active, so I cannot cut the background from the subject of the 2nd image, as the brush only affects the transparent layer of the first image, even though both of its layers are unchecked in the layers list. Is my processing method not suitable for achieving my aim, or is there a function I need to perform before I can work on the 2nd image?

I don't understand. If the tiff can contain the layers of the project, why bother saving as an Affinity file at all? Wouldn't it be possible to open the tiff in the future for re-working the project if desired?

Thanks very much for your responses John Rostron & Old Bruce. I understand what I needed to know. Cheers. Are png & jpg the only file types where the doc is auto flattened on export? I require png for tee-shirt printing, but for fine art prints I usually supply tiffs, for example.

I am creating designs in APhoto for printing. I've been told by a friend that I might need to provide a flattened file to the printer (I am aware the printer requires png files). I which situations should I flatten & what are pros & cons?

Also, is the a measuring rule tool that I can add along the edge of the chequered space so I don't have to count the tiny squares when I am aligning elements?

Thanks h_d, I've spent hours trying to figure this out. Thanks for the instructions. That's solved my issues.

I have an object I have cut from a photo image. I want to make 2 duplicates of the object & colour each of the 3 differently. First I made 2 duplicates of the original (background) image. I then succeeded in colouring one duplicate (following a video tutorial to create a new layer, a coloured version of the object which overlays the original duplicate). In the workspace the new pink layer is shown overlaying the original duplicate (I checked by moving it, which revealed the original duplicate beneath) & also the thumbnail in the layers list is coloured pink. These two layers have been auto-grouped I think, as they are now shown as one list entry, with a white arrow icon. When I choose the other duplicate in the layers list the image in the workspace doesn't change, still the pink duplicate is shown, unless I deselect the pink coloured grouped layers in the list. I don't understand how this works. Ideally I would like to have all 3 of the objects in the workspace together so I can work on their colours by comparison. How do I do this? (To complete the project I want the 3 objects placed side-by-side & saved as one image). I think I'm beginning to understand. The image object layers are stacked on top of each other, & the pink one is on top, that's why, even if I have a different one selected, the pink one still shows on top in the workspace (can this be changed without having to re-order the layers in the layer list?). I tried holding ctrl & moving a layer to the side of the one showing (in the workspace), to work on it, but it disappears as it leaves the chequered background. Can I create a new layer of a large chequered background that I can place the 3 objects on to work on them?