JimmyJack

Members
  • Content count

    696
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JimmyJack

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

417 profile views
  1. Placing the jpg does not include the clip. So it seems that the software's ability to choose to use or ignore already exists??
  2. Hi John, yeah, sorry, the word "map" helps . (I'll amend my post above) Google: noise displacement map or noise bump map or (maybe to a slightly lesser extent) noise height map Each result should lead to, in many cases, a site that offers even more.
  3. With all due respect to @carl123's equations..... seriously, it's amazing what he does with them (I wouldn't know where to begin). A) The point of the wiggles is to humanize the drawing right? To "warm it up" from sterile straight lines. With that in mind I find (imho) the equation squiggles to be too ordered and regular. The diagonals look okay because you get cross pollination from both equations which delivers a nice randomization. B) Equations are destructive. So it goes without saying, with any change to the drawing the whole thing will need to be re-equationed . Like you said, a macro can help. Instead, I'd just use a noisy displacement. (use the load from file option) You can make your own (my layer on top in the attached). Or grab one of the hundreds online. (Google: "noise displacement map" or "noise bump map") I threw in several different options. You can adjust each or combine different ones all while preserving the editability of the drawing (I assume the cad files come in as vectors). **attached is kinda big** arch_lines_displace.afphoto
  4. Rather than addressing your explanation, why don't we just go head to head. Your file (with a curve added) in all black to really get a good look, saved as a png from AffinityD and from Illustrator. I'll let you guess which is which. (the difference is actually much more pronounced out of a browser (mine at least)... such as in AD itself and elsewhere like Preview) The fact that they call this normal is the most distressing thing of all. If it's so normal why are there constantly people trying to come over from Ai saying "HEY what's up with these lines??" It's like they've resigned themselves to this result. At one point I remember a response from the Devs that included something like.... but we're working on improving this. But I haven't seen that included in a reply for a long time. It would be nice to at least "hear" again. Or maybe it's just not resolvable with the render engine approach they've chosen? I'm not saying AI is perfect all the time, but come on right? Night and day.
  5. Good eye! They look different because the Aligned version isn't aligned at that tip it's an overlap (the yellow shape is a bit wonky). The aliased edge of that triangle's tip is a mixture of red, yellow and green. The edge on the Overlapped version is a mixture of just red and green, so it's a bit darker. In reality though, by overlapping you've just shifted the problem right? Instead of the edges between the shapes its the edges around the perimeter that have trouble. So in order to get the best of both worlds you still need to be pretty precise with most (not all) vertex placements.
  6. @firstdefence since we're exchanging techniques..... I liked what you did above with the capsules. But that locks your offset to the size of the squares you're using. Consider this: Draw a line constrained to 45° from the capsule box border corner. Now the copy will be constrained to that geometry when being resized and can be any size you want.... on the fly.
  7. Didn't work for me .... at least not in the example I have going. I'll have to look into further. Same thing we're doing here just with two separate curves. NOT bridging the gap. Placing an end node on top of another (+ the other steps).
  8. Well this is where I believe @Dan C's answer comes from. Sharp nodes are fine (no handles to respect in the calculation). BUT... if the last nodes are sharp then all of each of the end segments' curviness has to come from the one handle of the node before it. This makes a lot of shapes impossible. Including my off the cuff example above (right side), so I don't think it's a rare event. Also, I really don't want to have to keep that special circumstance in mind when drawing something. Yes you can join the two sharp nodes and go back in and make it smooth/"smart"again and rework the angles......... click click click click click ....uh uh . But again, the two curve solution respects handles. So I don't get it. Thanks for trying though .
  9. Hi Dan, Any tips on how to do this without destroying the nature of the curve? (pretty sure I've tried all the modifier combos) When joining two separate curves, moving one node on top of another, then selecting both, then hitting Join Curves works (despite being somewhat of a convoluted process). But not here? Yup.... and right on.
  10. Hey Carl. You can do either. Erasing is the same as a black brush on masks. @Alan Leckey kind of an interesting photo. Bottom line is .... that's the color of your street lines. In the original photo, next to the color of the cobblestones the lines appear yellow(ish). But next to the grey of the B&W they look green(ish). Here's a section of the stripe with nothing done to it..... just masked off from the rest of the image on a white background. Lookin' pretty green to me .
  11. Gareth, I can't say I follow a lot of that. Maybe post an example? In the meantime.... please be careful with Remove White Paper. Any part/color of the image with an L value greater than 50 will also be partially (according to the L%) erased. Perhaps this is what's happened and what you're referring to when you say "its overlaying tones from the original image"?
  12. You asked about saving jpgs with clipping paths. This is the option to do that under the more button when exporting a jpg. I don't use InDesign, but I would assume it's like PS. Bring in the jpg, select the path, reassign it as a vector clipping (or pixel) mask. Exporting as PSD will preserve the actual clipping hierarchy ... no need to reassign anything. (Although there may be some extraneous empty elements included in the conversion) Alpha channels are a bit different. Affinity doesn't seem to export separate alphas as of yet. Only as part of a file format that supports transparency like png.... but not their own channel. You will have to use the paths to create the alpha channels.
  13. Under More
  14. Make both the gradient and adjustment children of the diamond plate image.
  15. What @dutchshader 's saying is the case. Clearly there's a bounding box around the whole canvas. Hidden layer? Shape with no fill? Whatever. Get rid of that (it has to be deleted (edit: or clipped)... hiding is not enough. pita.) and you'll be fine with Clip Canvas. (oh, and you don't need the marching ants to use ClipC )