JimmyJack

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.

Under More

Make both the gradient and adjustment children of the diamond plate image.

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 )

This is what I get opening a ShutterStock eps in Photo. Can't imagine that the OPs downloaded eps would be that small. We will see. My guess is stroke vs fill? Or it's all gradients or images (or some other overall rasterized effect)? Hmmm, but even just a simple circle is way crazy, it would have to be miniscule.... I dunno.

@MEB could you please come back here and share the results with the rest of us? This could be useful information for everyone. Thanks. edit: (.... or @andrewjones764, maybe you can post just a piece or two here? (don't want you get in trouble with the shutter police))

In Designer you can also work in pixel mode. Use the selection brush.

This is a line while drawing with intentional jitteriness.... and then on mouse release.... with stabilizer OFF. Sure there will be more nodes. But, Off should be Off.

Yup, u got it!! Both methods are fine in this case. I'm just lazier than @toltec . What do I win ? But seriously, it is good for you to know how to set up bleeds/marks for output.

Don't add the bleed dimension to the size of the document. That area/dimension is beyond the size of the invite... not included in it. I took your file and threw a pair together. The invite is one image 'cuz that's what was in your file. I put in a space to change out names on one side. To go to the embedded document double click on it on the page. As you can see here it now bleeds without the added size. (the "reception to follow" line seems a little tight to the bottom ) two up.afdesign

Oh I see the different names now. Okay. Then export the two different files and place them on one A4 sized page.

@jemmalee It's two of the same invite right? Export one pdf at real size with bleeds, crops etc. Open in Preview, and go to print. Pick A4, Two-Up (copies per page), 100% scale. Export as PDF from within the print dialog window dropdown.

Thank you. Me either. FYI @stokerg (et al)..... also happening in Photo with it's quasi-vectors, shapes and image layers.

Both stroke and fill result in replacing the pixel layer with basically a Fill Layer a la AP. Is this what you want?? Consider this. If I have a rectangle, rasterize it (now pixel) and click on and/or change the fill, nothing happens (as it should). The pixel rectangle shouldn't be replaced with a canvas of color. This is what's happening for me with the OP file. Curve + pixel selected > click on stroke color black > the whole page turns black. And with a bit of a hang up too.

@silverlocks If you mean every element has to be all black... You can select all your groups and hit FX color overlay. The default is black. But if you mean everything has to be a value of black, you can just switch the document to be grey (8 or 16 bit). Or, if you still want color elsewhere, group everything with a B & W (or HSL) adjustment. Edit: To sidestep the odd behavior discussed below, you could of course just select everything then deselect the two graphics and do what Stokerg said... just set the stroke to black. So that would be: CMD drag select all the individual elements > hold down shift and click on the two graphics to deselect them > set stroke color. @stokerg Seems like this bug is more than just this document. It happens for me on any file with any curve & pixel layer combination. New doc > draw curve (or shape) > make pixel layer (doesn't even need to have anything in it) > select both > try and change stroke or fill.

Hey Maxxx, So now I'm not 100% sure I understand your question. (not sure what you're doing with the boxes) If you mean rotating the result as in rotating a 3D object in a 3D space, then no Affinity does not have that ability like Photoshop CC (or Pshop Extended before it). But if you mean rotate the result as in changing the label out quickly with another piece of artwork without having to redo the warp each time.... then you can set up a macro to do the "heavy lifting". Just place/paste in the new artwork, hit the macro, and you should be done. But in any case.... yes, you're correct. The warp procedure is destructive. There is no way to change any individual design elements within the label after a warp has been done. Edit: Oh, I think I get it re the boxes. You're using the live perspective filter. Which is itself editable, as well as the item(s) it's distorting.

Hmm. I'm getting a decent warp result (imho). Are you using just the part of the label that would be visible? .... and the warp cage. Basically just the corners.

Easiest way.... IMHO. FX > Color Overlay • Just set the color if you don't care about the aliasing. • Set it to Screen to address the A-hole that @Alfred pointed out ( - this is the real reason why I'm posting a reply).... and to continue on with color aliasing. • To reintroduce transparency aliasing follow @owenr's directions instead.

A) the fact that there are so many "how do I join nodes?" threads is appalling. This is a vector drawing program FCOL. It should be drop dead stupid easy...... and is in Illustrator, et al. B) On to this particular drawing: @Bri-Toon I think you went astray a bit earlier than that. Hitting divide with both curves selected gave you a long list of (crazy) pieces. A bit like herding cats at that point . I'm actually amazed that they all came back together in the end. Doing the divides one at a time will result in just the line and circles being separated. But the long workaround isn't necessary. Your problem is two-fold: 1) that little hiccup @R C-R is pointing out is part of the original drawing. 2) your concept to join the elements is sound, it's just that extra point.... and that several of your points aren't snapped into alignment (see attachment). To Fix: From your "Drawing A" state. Take a second to snap those points correctly (honestly you really don't need this step.... but to be perfect) and then.... 1) delete (or move ) the extra point 2) Add the Curves layers. Done. (Not aligning the points first will result in a new little hiccup on the bottom straight line. But because the're on a straight line, it's easy to just delete them after the add.) Actually some of the alignment thing can be avoided in the first place by not having those vertices fall directly on the boundaries of the other shape....

Nawwww. I went outside once. The graphics weren't that good. Grab a handwritten font. Give it an FX emboss Optional: Distort it a little if you want. (I used ripple and diffuse) Layer it a couple times with blend modes/opacity to taste. summer.afphoto

Looks like you need to have 2 as the # of mirrors in order to get a vertical split line. (it would be nice to have a modifier key to constrain the drag direction though ) But for the angle, play with the input parameter. Tip: seems like the further away from the dial the finer the control is. Also, you can just type a number into the field. (Original is at a heavy angle. Corrected with the 157° input.) Of course, you could also just adjust the angle beforehand... as u mentioned.

I don't see why you wouldn't be able to do it in the filter. When the filter window is open, are you clicking and dragging on the image? Of course you don't have to use the filter at all. You can do this with a copy of the image and clipping. Perhaps a post of the actual image and what you want to do to it (where you want the mirror) would help.

Ah. So clearly they got it working. I chimed in on the nibbly bits in the other thread .

Select all three line segments and hit "Join Curves" in the Node tool context tool bar. ... and adjust Mitre as @toltec mentions.

How about: Duplicate the chevron With the duplicate over the circle, and both selected, hit Subtract. (in this case, I think the arms do extend far enough to catch all of that part of the circle) Yields the desired look, albeit with a pie underneath the chevron. If he/she really needs an open arc... Then yes, break and delete is needed.