Jump to content

JimmyJack

Members
  • Content count

    759
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JimmyJack

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

508 profile views
  1. Ya don't really need to find the center.... a la @carl123's method. I've got a slight twist. Two tangential guides > Draw out a constrained marquee from the corner. Should fit perfectly. No need to slide into place. But yeah.... kinda mind boggling that we can't draw marquees from the center. But as MEB said, it's a known "issue".
  2. Yes, you can do this.... if your box is converted to a curve. Just use the Node tool and select everything you want to move.
  3. Just wanted to add a quick addendum if I may: u don't necessarily have to expand stroke and boolean. (layer is in mask position) @reglico Good luck Sunday!!
  4. Cool. Not confusing at all . If you want/need vectors stay with the boolean route as @firstdefence showed.
  5. JimmyJack

    Low print quality of print press document

    @JMV I hope @MikeW added some clarity. I'm chiming back in just to add that I'm now having less success when moving only the gradient middle point, so just stick with the ends. (since I'm here, a picture is worth 1000 words....so in this case 1006 words )
  6. If the final output is to be raster, this can be done with just an Erase blend and an FX. And the text remains editable text. The important part is to "group" the eraser object with the stuff that needs to be erased. That way the elements underneath (pink here) aren't touched. (the eraser shape (ellipse here) needs a fill at 100% opacity for the erase to work....the FX is Outline)
  7. JimmyJack

    Low print quality of print press document

    Two strange things: (I think someone (@Dan C is already here) at Serif should look at these) 1) There's something funky going on with that gradient which is causing the rasterization. Change any handle position (even the middle marker) just slightly and nothing will rasterize. I have no clue as to why that particular gradient is doing this. I certainly can't reproduce it. 2) Okay, so now nothing is rasterized. BUT now, when opening the PDF, all the shapes' bounding boxes are perpendicular to the gradient angle. Not fun. And that is reproducible.
  8. I've had some success going through a none Adobe intermediate program. For example: open in Preview (mac), save as postscript (through print dialog) open in AD. I certainly haven't vetted if that works with all blends, smart objects etc.... but worth a shot. That file looks like a worthy litmus test.
  9. If you've created or resized the square by hand (without any mm snapping etc) AND your prefs allow for just 1 decimal place for mm's.... Then anything .95 > X < 1.05 will register as 1.
  10. So I'm clear in my head... a closed rectangle, as far as the computer is concerned has five nodes? But only four as far as the user or any of the tools are concerned concerned. But if one is broken, then there are five for both computer and user? And the two as one node hops around to whichever point is the head? And.... then, if there are two nodes at the head tail junction, why can't I get a loop like the weird curve from the below when deleting the three selected nodes.
  11. Are you saying that "it" is a "they" but for all practical user interface interactions they're acting like a single point? i.e. One click to select and move (not click dragging a marquee to grab both). Two handles working together etc. If they are merely coincident I would expect to be able to move each point independently... even if they are connected. If they are two coincident points (connected or not) I would expect to see only one handle when each is selected (at that proximity). And I would expect to be able to switch back and forth using shift + control drag. If I add another node to the weird curve and break that new node, one of those points is now the (open) end point. Does the curve now have four nodes? Or did the original "weird" node now truly become one?
  12. These are more than stray single points. They are full fledged single node closed objects.... (almost). They have volume, can support fills, line styles/brushes, pressure profiles, and most (this is why I said "almost" above) boolean operations... Add only seems to work if the single point is inside of the object you want to add to. They can be recreated at will ! (GIF below. The OP's objects are replicated, sans round caps, when one of the handles is deleted about 22secs in.) (Not sure is this is a bug exploitation or not. Doing it any other way, i.e. deleting just three points of a circle etc yields no object at all.)
  13. Nope, the substitute dots are NOT two points.... I'm zoomed in 400 million% . You might be confusing the bezier handle for a second node. It's not. By breaking the one node you create two, of course. I mentioned this in my post. Join them back together (not just on top of each other) and the object remains. Ok. So you copied and pasted a nearby dot. How did you make the first one??
  14. @SS Gilbert I would really like to know how you made the substitute dots. Because it seems like you've done the impossible. They are single node enclosed objects. Wow!! In Affinity world they shouldn't show up at all. That being said, they're appearing here as dots solely because of the Round Cap end line style. If you change to Butt Cap they look like this, . (and the stroke color here is black). Oh, and the object pulled on a bit..... I've attached it for the Devs (@GabrielM) , or anybody else to look at. It's not two points on top of each other as far as I can tell!! And if you break the node, pull the now two nodes apart then bring them back together, they join into one and still exists as an object. Pretty weird. one point closed object.afdesign
  15. I opened it in Preview. Saved it as a .ps out of the print dialog. Seems like what you want. The page size might not be right but everything seems to scale just fine..... everything is vector. .ps attached Edit: be careful though. The crown is suffering from the familiar Affinity bleed through. That's going to happen no matter what you do. At print (or even pixel size) maybe it's small enough to not be too noticeable? D2D-Opt-Out-Application-Form-2015.ps
×