Energeiai

Hello Angler,
Welcome to Affinity Forums :)
Assuming you have scanned a black signature in a piece of paper, go to Filters ▸ Colours ▸ Erase White Paper to make it transparent, then on the bottom of the Layers panel. click on the Layer Effects button and choose Colour Overlay to be able to change the colour of the signature to whatever you want. To edit the colour later double-click the FX icon in front of the signature layer name to open the Layer Effects dialog again.
You can scale and position the signature, using the Move Tool (the black arrow in the toolbar). To position it just make sure the layer/signature is selected (click on it) and drag it to position wherever you want. To scale it click and drag one of the corner handles.

Hi m-b,
Affinity native file format(s) are compatible between all Affinity apps.
There's no need to create a document in Designer and open it in Photo. You can simply work in Designer as usual and if you need to move everything to Photo (History included) go to menu File ▸ Edit in Photo... The inverse is also true.

Hi Poziomka,
 
On the Print Window under Rasterization, you can enable Rasterize entire page and this should allow you to print direct from Affinity without having to export to PDF first. I only get line around one of the objects at the bottom (Left) and if this is Rasterized, it also resolves the issue. The logo for some reason has a green global colour assigned to it, not sure why, but removing that makes no difference. Also editing the document and setting the document background to transparent also has no effect, but rasterizing should.
 
I'm going to continue to look at the file as something is causing the issue, in the meantime you can continue to export to PDF. I've tested it and everything looks as it should when exported.

I struggled with this too..... when I selected text the options I got for kerning were 0% or auto, everything else greyed out..... after a bit of searching it seems you can only do between two letters (which makes sense).
Place the cursor between the two letters you want to draw closer or move apart, rather than select a word, and the kerning option then magically lets you choose or type in a figure. 
If it doesn't work for you you'll need to give the mods/members a bit more info.

Hi VIPStephan,
You don't need to go through all that trouble. Just select the objects, go to File ▸ Export and select Selection with background (or without background) from the Area dropdown in the Export dialog. Only the three objects and the background area behind them will be exported. Usually document based crops are only used when working with single photos where they are the single elements on the composition, not so much in designs/layouts where the images are just a part (an element) of the whole composition/layout and usually the document size is already fixed to a specific dimension from beginning (paper dimensions for example). I understand that in some cases it may be practical to have a quick way to resize the canvas - even for design/layouts - but for that cases you can always convert the existing canvas into an artboard which you can easily resize with the Move Tool or with the Transform panel if you need to set a specific dimension. I believe some users are not aware of the ability to resize artboards directly with the Move Tool. In any case this is already in the Feature Requests section as you pointed out.

I know this is an old topic, but thank you @MEB, this solved a huge issue I was having - I am exporting images to use in a formatted book page, and the close cropping to the line was causing pixelation at the edges (of the formatted page I was using - nothing wrong with Affinity.) I was completely unaware of how to use Artboard function, but it was exactly what I needed (instead of cropping the canvas.) And thanks for tirelessly answering questions on here.

With this procedure, the curvature of the two end nodes don't match the curvature of the others after the conversion to smooth nodes. For some uses, this isn't desirable, but a simple modification will fix that:

Hi idraw,
Here's a quick way to draw consistent wavy lines. The same technique can be applied for springs.
This isn't intended to devalue your request for a precise geometric tool for this kind of needs, which i agree it's quite useful.
It's just a way to help you solve the problem with the available tools/resources we have at the moment.
waves.mov

Hi Zwiefe,
Welcome to the forums
Please see my response to a similar question here!

Hi BobsDaubs, 
You are correct that DPI/PPI isn't relevant to vector images. Even when exporting to a bitmap, PPI doesn't affect the content; it is only used to calculate the export resolution (i.e. the number of pixels in the image).
To use Mark's example: you've created a vector image, and you want to print it on a 300 DPI printer, and you want it to fill a 6"x4" page. So you need to export image at 1800x1200. 
We save the DPI in the image's metadata as a hint to other programs that you wanted it 6"x4", but they're free to ignore this and print at a different DPI - e.g. printing at 600 DPI would will result in a 3"x2" printed image. 

Balling,
 
Welcome to the Serif Affinity Forums,  :)
 
Technically you are correct, but there is a widespread acceptance of the term DPI as being understood to mean PPI.
 
This thread covers this quite well, as does this and this and this and this, so you see you are not alone in asking and we do consider all user requests, so thank you.

For something labeled as an (Embedded Document) in the Layers panel? The behavior you describe is what I would expect for something labeled as (Image).
Placed JPG, TIFF, and PNG files are (Image) layers. Placed EPS, SVG, PSD, PDF, AFPHOTO, and AFDESIGN files are (Embedded Document) layers.

If you want to do it via the 'Layer Effects' settings for a layer or group, I've added it to the original post as method 9 (this creates the same end result as method 2).

 

There are a number of different ways to remove colour, however these are probably the most common ways:
1) Go to Document > Colour Format > Greyscale.  Although I never use this as it's destructive and removes the colour information permanently
2) Go to Layer > New Fill Layer, fill it with white and set the layer blend mode to 'Colour'
3) Add a Channel Mixer Adjustment Layer and change the Output Channel to 'Grey'
4) Add a Curves Adjustment Layer, set the layer blend mode to 'Colour', then drag the bottom-left corner point of the curve to the top-left corner (so that it's a horizontal line)
5) Add a HSL Adjustment Layer and drag the 'Saturation Shift' slider all the way to the left (-100%)
6) Add a Black & White Adjustment Layer
7) Add a Black & White Adjustment Layer, and change the default values from 100%, to the following values to mimic method 3 (adding a Channel Mixer Adjustment Layer).  R=29.8%, Y=88.5%, G=58.9%, C=69.9%, B=11.4%, M=41.2% (for RGB 8-bit images only, the values will be different for RGB 16-bit images).  You can record this as a macro.
8) Add a Soft Proof Adjustment Layer and set the Proof Profile to 'Greyscale D50'.  This will mimic method 1 (Document > Colour Format > Greyscale)
9) To do it via 'Layer Effects' for a layer or group.  Open the 'Layer Effects' settings.  Go to 'Colour Overlay' and set Blend Mode to Colour, Opacity to 100% and Colour to white or black.
 
It's worth noting that the different methods give different end results as a straight B&W conversion, as per the below examples (click on the first image, then use the left/right arrow keys to scroll through them).  The Monochromacy/Achromatopsia 'Color Blindness Simulator' on this site, appears to be using something similar to methods 2 or 3 above.










 

A question for experienced logo designers:
 
When tasked with creating a new logo, how do you deal with the issue of size?
 
For example, the client may want to use the logo on a business card or small thumbnail on a website, but may also want to use it on a large banner.
 
If it is all vector it should be scalable - but at what size do you begin designing originally?
 
Any other tips or methods you've found that would be helpful?
 
Thanks!
 
:)

I guess you design at the main medium's scale and then adjust for other mediums.
 
For example, if your client is a magazine that's going to have its logo mainly on print, you should design for that at first and adjust for other mediums.
But if you're designing a logo for a company that makes GPS software for cars and that's their main medium (low/med resolution screens) then you design for that and create versions for other mediums (print and devices).
 
In icon design we create different versions for different screen resolutions so in logo design you should too design different versions for different mediums, color availability, and uses.

Some confusion regarding web resolution, PPI/DPI, how to prepare for the web, and such.
DPI is completely irrelevant for web and screen (mobile/tablet/desktop) work. Forget about DPI or PPI. It tells nothing about the actual resolution of a file. 1 pixel can be saved at 50000ppi, and a million pixels at 1ppi. It is merely a parameter that tells print software at what relative size it should be printed.
  Technically DPI is the wrong term in Affinity's dialogs. PPI (Pixels Per Inch) is the correct term.
  For web/screen export, think PIXELS. When designing for screen output only pixels count. Forget PPI! Screen tech and software ignores that parameter.
  In the early BFP (Before Flat Panels) resolution of screens was more or less related to the size of those screens. The larger the CRT screen, the higher the possible resolution. 1 pixel equated to 1 pixel. I was very simple to calculate the required resolution/pixel dimensions of an asset for a web page: just export at the exact pixel size required.
For example, if a logo had to be placed at 600px by 100px, that is what you exported and prepared it at. PPI was (and still is) entirely irrelevant.
  Things changed quite a bit AFP (After the introduction of flat screen technology). No longer can we relate the physical size of a screen to its physical pixel resolution.
The first iPad had a 1024x768 resolution. The iPad 3 introduced the retina screen, which offers double that: 2048x1536. The screen size did, however, not change.
Nowadays much smaller screens than an iPad screen are capable of displaying higher resolutions than that.
  Desktop screens display 4K or even 8K now, but the actual physical dimensions of those screens are similar or the same as the previous generations.
  This poses a problem to screen/web designers: at what pixel dimensions should assets be produced?
To solve this problem the concept of MULTIPLIERS was introduced by screen designers.
  The multiplier tells the designer at what pixel dimensions a bitmap asset should be exported. The goal is to hit the native pixel resolution/dimensions for each targeted platform/screen (or close to that resolution).
Example iPad 1: assets are exported at the native resolution (related to 1024x768 pixel screen). We prepare @1x: 600px by 100px.
Example iPad >3: this is a device for which we prepare @2x assets: 1200px by 200px
Result: we deliver two assets when our target platform is the regular iPad.
  For web export, at least @1x and @2x assets are required. When using the correct responsive <img> tag code, a browser will load up the correct version depending on whether the screen it is viewed at is retina or not.
At this point the screen designer must realize that only providing a @1x asset will result in fuzzy looking bitmap graphics on a retina screen.
  But many handheld devices have far higher PPI resolutions (recall that PPI tells us about the relationship between the screen size and the native screen resolution). Very small screens at incredible high resolutions. @3x, @4x, and even @5x.
How do we figure out the multipliers?
Answer: we check the configurations, and calculate the multiplier. Luckily, someone already did this for us:
https://material.io/resources/devices/
  This means that BEFORE designing any bitmap screen asset, the designer MUST decide what the highest target multiplier must be.
And create the bitmap asset at that highest resolution.
  At this point a "pixel" as a unit is unsuitable as a base unit when discussing the dimensions of a bitmap asset. Therefore, DP and PT units were introduced. DP ("dip"(s)) is a Google coined 'unit'. PT (point(s)) is Apple's preferred 'unit'.
  Example: We need to prepare a 600px *100px bitmap asset. When we communicate this to our fellow designers and developers, we no longer use pixels, but either dips or points. 600dp/pt by 100dp/pt.
Next, we must decide on the highest multiplier: with @3x we target most devices right now.
We then define the highest resolution with the formula 3x600 and 3x100.
We create a new document at 1800px by 300px, and work at this base resolution.
This is required for all our assets in this project.
  When the final asset is to be delivered, export all multiplier versions with a standardized prefix or suffix which indicates the multiplier.
In our example above, that means three bitmap assets: logo.png, logo@2x.png, logo@3x.png

   

Other recommendations:
if possible, export as vector SVG files. In this case there is no need to worry about multipliers. Do make sure the SVG code is responsive, and automatically scales up and down in a HTML tag container.
  Even better, if you deal with GUI elements, work with the built-in framework GUI options. For example, instead of exporting that flat button design as a bitmap, use SVG. But if that same button design can be replicated using HTML and CSS styling code, definitely run with that last option.
Built-in GUI components tops SVG which tops bitmaps.
  If it can be helped, never use JPG for sharp looking text, line art, logos, vector work, etc. JPG works well for photos and multi-tone images, but visibly degrades those aforementioned types of graphics due to the lossy compression algorithm
  Instead, use PNG. If your work consists of less than ~256 colours and tints, indexed PNG files are preferable and save file space. The best way to compress a PNG is worth an entire post by itself. Suffice to say, to best compress and optimize PNG files dedicated tools are required. Image editors are not that great at it. I use ColorQuantizer, which is (in my opinion) the best PNG optimization tool currently available. Only for Windows, though. But worth it and free! http://x128.ho.ua/color-quantizer.html
  WebP is also excellent for both photos as well as sharp non-lossy assets (WebP support both lossy and non-lossy), and supported by all major browsers now. Except, of course, Apple. Safari does not support it. 😞 Neither does Affinity, which only opens these files, but does not export to webp.  
@Ali1 Your original issue has to do with attempting to export a 600x100 px asset "as is" from a vector package. In my experience there is just NO chance to get a good quality acceptable result, even in Illustrator. This is caused by a couple of things, such as non-decimal positioning, which adds unwanted soft anti-aliasing to the edges.
What works well to maintain high-quality sharp looking anti-aliased low resolution assets are the following steps:
work at a 3 to 4 times higher resolution. export at that bitmap resolution. Optional: perform some pre-downscale sharpening. open the result in an image editor like Affinity Photo, and scale down to the required lower resolution. Optional: perform some post-downscale sharpening. the result will be much better looking. Ideally use a downsampling algorithm such as Catmull-Rom. This works extremely well to maintain sharp details. Unfortunately, most image editors do not support this.
Of course, if you are already working at a @3x or @4x multiplier, the above steps generally are not required, because your base resolution is already very high. But it depends a bit on the image editor: the only way to check for quality is to go though the above steps at least one time, and compare your manually exported version with the automatic ones.