[CURIOUS PRICING]

Don't feed the troll. I'm off this thread.

[CURIOUS PRICING]

Seems straightforward enough to me: if you buy in Jersey, the price is £89.99; if you buy in mainland UK, the price is £74.99 + VAT.

Serif can charge what they like in different countries. If you prefer your extra £15 to go to Serif, buy it in Jersey; if you prefer the £15 to go to His Majesty's Revenue and Customs, buy in the mainland.

Martin

[Scanning errors in Affinity Photo]

It is baffling that Affinity are letting this drag on so long without resolution, or even comment. If it's Affinity's fault they should fix it. If it's Apple's fault they should keep pestering Apple until Apple fix it.

Martin

[Scanning errors in Affinity Photo]

21 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

Well a scanner manufactors own driver and tools should be the basic requirements here for a direct access to a Canon TS8200, without that also Apple's "Image Capture" would be lost here for accessing that Canon device.

Certainly you need a driver, but I'm pretty sure there's a driver for Canon printers built into the MacOS. I never installed anything from Canon onto my Mac – I just plugged in the printer-scanner and it works (except with Affinity, which is why we're here). You certainly don't need Canon's tools for scanning – Apple's work just as well, though you can use Canon's if you prefer them.

Quote

- Thus "Image Capture" would alternatively only give you some results by using it via an iPhone cam shot then as a replacement for the scanner.

I don't understand what you mean here.

MST

[Scanning errors in Affinity Photo]

23 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

Use Canon's "IJ Scan Utility" or  "MP Navigator EX" software etc. instead, if available for your TS8200. - Don't aquire the scanner from inside of Affinity, instead use Canon's scanner software and save the scan as a file on disk, afterwards open/place the file into Affinity then.

Better still, use Apple's "Image Capture", which comes as standard with all Mac software.

Martin

[Scanning errors in Affinity Photo]

I'm getting the same problems with my Canon TS8350 under Monterey (MacOS 12.0.1)

Martin

[Crash when using scanner]

Turning hardware acceleration off makes no difference.

I get a similar result to Wilfred Hildonen, but only scanning in Black and White at 200dpi. Other resolutions, and colour scanning are fine.

However, it won't scan at all if I set the scan to 'Text': "Scanner reported an error An error occurred during scanning." No problems using Image Capture.

Martin

[Crash when using scanner]

I don't know if this is the same bug, but scanning at 200dpi doesn't work – or rather, it produces weird results which other scanning programs don't produce.

See the attached file.

Martin

Scanning bug.afphoto

[15 Reasons Why I stopped using Affinity Photo]

On 4/30/2021 at 12:11 PM, fde101 said:

On 4/29/2021 at 5:19 AM, PeterinJapan said:

add to the selection by holding the shift key

For some reason they used the control key for this in Affinity Photo.  The option key works as you described.

Yes, it does. But one of the huge strengths of Macintosh has always been consistency between applications.

For example, in 1980, to Quit a program sometimes it was Quit, sometimes it was Exit, or Stop, or Leave, or QQuit.... Apple put an end to that by saying it had to be 'Quit'. Similarly, all programs use Cmnd-X for Cut, Cmnd-V for Paste, etc.

This consistency is worth maintaining, and I, too, would prefer it if Affinity marquees used the same keys as every other Mac program, sc. hold Shift to add to a marquee, Command to subtract from it.

MST

[Crash when using scanner]

Hi:

I have a Canon TS8350 printer-scanner. If I use it to 'Acquire Image...' in Affinity Photo I can scan documents directly into Affinity. However, the box which allows me to control the parameters of the scan (resolution, image size, etc.) has an option for Image Correction. If I use this box to correct the image using the scanner software (or possibly MacOS), Affinity scans the image but then immediately crashes.

Consistent and repeatable.

Martin S Taylor

iMac Pro, MacOS 10.14.6; Affinity Photo 1.9.3

[Crashes on Printing Selection]

I set up a document with A5 pages and print it as a 'booklet', ie. two-up onto A4 paper. In the Print dialog I set 'Document Layout' to be 'Booklet'.

If something is selected in the documents, then under 'Range and Scale' I have the option to print just the 'Selection'. If I take this option and then try to print, Publisher crashes. Consistent and repeatable.

I'm on an iMac Pro running the latest Mojave.

Martin S Taylor

[Reveal in Finder from document title bar]

Thanks, done.

Also, there's an advantage in having a pop-up menu if you right-click the title of the document: you can see where the document is stored in the Finder without actually having to open a Finder window and leave Affinity. Only a small advantage, but it's there.

MST

[Reveal in Finder from document title bar]

What's the protocol here for saying "I agree"?

Do I say "Me too"? Or "+1"? Or post a graphic of a thumbs up?

Whatever, I strongly agree with WestSlopeGuide.

Please allow right-clicking on the title of the document to reveal the current file in the Finder. Consistency across all Mac apps is (well, used to be) one of the biggest advantages of using Macs, and we really should do all we can to maintain it.

Martin S Taylor

[Adding handles]

Thanks, haakoo. We knew all this. The problem is that moving the line segment repositions the handles at both ends of the line segment, and that's not what we want. anon2 has shown how to do it.

[Adding handles]

10 hours ago, anon2 said:

No you don't! I've told you twice already to opt/alt-drag so that only one handle is extended. If it didn't work, I'd not be telling you to do it. I don't know why it fails for you.

Yes, I'm sorry, you're right, of course. I forgot to hold down the option key. I find it a bit weird that the pen tool works in such a totally different way if a node is selected.

I still think it would be more intuitive to have this function devolved to the Node Tool (isn't this exactly the kind of task that the Node Tool is for?), but you've at least shown me how it's possible to do what I need to do.

And between us, I think we've corrected a lot of misapprehensions on the part of others in this thread.

Cheers, Martin

[Adding handles]

1 hour ago, anon2 said:

I told you how to do it by (optionally reversing the curve direction and then) opt/alt-dragging on the selected node with the Pen Tool, and that definitely works on my machine. Obviously, if you aren't otherwise using the Pen Tool, then activating it is slightly inconvenient.

Yes, and thank you anon2. That, at least, is a way to do it.

But you first have to use the Node Tool (to select the node), then go the Pen Tool, then possibly reverse the direction of the curve (is there an easy way to see which way round the curve goes?) then opt-drag out the selected node, then (very likely) go back to the Node Tool to make some fine adjustments.

The other awkwardness is that if the node currently has no handles, you have to add two handles and then delete one of them, which seems a bit ridiculous.

I'd simply like a way of using the Node Tool to add one handle, and since opt-drag doesn't currently do anything different from ordinary dragging, it's available for this purpose.

[Adding handles]

2 minutes ago, Alfred said:

Again, if you had a handle that you could drag you’d also disturb the other end of the curve segment. Short of creating cusp nodes at each end, I can’t see any way around this.

Let's give this one more shot, shall we? Have a look at this diagram:

 

 

I want a second handle which extends from point A, so that the line C will bulge upwards some more. I don't want to move point A, point B, or any of the handles you can see in the diagram at the moment. (Please don't anybody tell me that's not what I want. I do want it. That should be enough.)

If I click on A with either the Node Tool or the Pen Tool, with or without modifier keys held down, I either smooth A (which I don't want) or move A or its existing handle. If I drag the line at point C (which, I think, is what Alfred is suggesting) it will disturb the handles at B. Again, I don't want this.

All I'm asking for is that I can use the Node Tool together with an unused modifier key (eg. option-drag) in order to 'pull out' a second extended handle from point A. Point A will then be a sharp node with two handles: the existing handle (which will not be moved by my proposal) and a new handle which will affect the shape of curve C but will not affect the handles at B.

I hope this is all clear – people seem to be making such heavy weather of it.

[Adding handles]

3 minutes ago, Alfred said:

Thanks for the clarification, Martin. In that case, simply drag on that side of the curve to alter its appearance: the other handle should appear when you do this.

We're almost there, aren't we? The problem with your solution is that it disturbs the handle(s) at the other end of the curve-segment. Again, I don't want to do this.

 

[Adding handles]

8 minutes ago, Alfred said:

If you have a sharp node, regardless of whether it has one control handle or two visible, I don’t think there’s any way to show another handle without disturbing anything.

Exactly. I'd like one, please. Hokusai seems to agree with me.

Quote

When you move that handle you’re going to change the appearance of the curve anyway, so it’s no use worrying about it, and if you’re not going to move the handle there’s not much point in being able to see it in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean. I want a new handle which I can move, so that I can alter the appearance of the curve on one side of the node. I don't want to alter the appearance of the curve on the other side of the node, so I want the original, visible, handle to stay where it is.

[Adding handles]

28 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Sharp points do not have control point handles, I will grant you that.  They may still have control points behind the scenes depending on how Serif implemented them, but they do not have handles representing the positions of those control points.

I'm not sure what is meant by "reducing its length to zero" but when you option+click on a node it turns it into a sharp point, leaving NO handles for control points.  If an adjacent node is still a smooth point you may still see the handle for a control point of the adjacent node to the one which is selected; if you drag on that you will see the other appear while you are dragging it, which makes it a little more clear what actually happened.

I can draw a shape so that a node has one handle which I can manipulate. Just take a regular, smooth, two-handled node and use the Node Tool to option-click on one of its handles. That handle disappears and the other does not. This is the situation I illustrated in the picture that I posted about an hour ago. The node at the bottom right is selected, using the node tool, and there is one handle visible and manipulable. I cannot see a second handle or make a second handle visible.

I have always considered that this is a node with one handle, which seems a reasonable way of looking at it. However, Alfred says

Quote

All that’s happening there is that you’re setting the node-to-handle distance to zero.

I don't care how it's implemented. I don't care if the handle has been deleted, or if I've "set the node-to-handle distance to zero". I'd just like some way of getting hold of a second handle without disturbing the position of the visible handle or the node itself.

Martin

[Adding handles]

12 minutes ago, Alfred said:

All that’s happening there is that you’re setting the node-to-handle distance to zero.

The distinction between a) deleting a handle and b) reducing its length to zero without deleting it is a bit subtle for me.

If I change a node from a regular smooth node to a sharp point, would you say that the node now has no handles or that it still has two handles but you've reduced the node-to-handle distance to zero? How can you tell? Is there any meaningful difference?

Martin

[Adding handles]

Quote

 

How can a node have only one control point?

There might be one with both handles on top of each other so that there only appears to be one, but as far as I can tell there is no way to get a node with a single control point in the Affinity products - with only one you would have a different type of curve altogether than a bezier...

 

Make a regular, two-handled node, then option-click on one of the handles. See the picture.

Martin

[Adding handles]

Thanks Hokusai. I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. If a node has no handles, it's hard to add one handle to it. You can, of course, add two handles, and then remove one of them by opt-click.

What's a real pain, though, is if a node has one handle and you wish to add a second without disturbing the first – or moving the node itself. That's something I occasionally want to do, and can't do using the node tool, nor, I think, in any other way. It would be easy to arrange it so that opt-drag using the node tool 'dragged out' a second handle from the node.

Martin

[Consistent graphic for 'Maintain Aspect Ratio']

Quote

For example, the word "Proportional" with a simple checkbox next to it is abundantly clear, without any cutesy graphic.

Not if English isn't your first language.

MST

('Proportional' is an excellent example, since many non-native English speakers confuse 'proportional' and 'proportionate'.)

[Consistent graphic for 'Maintain Aspect Ratio']

In the Transform pane, there's a graphic which shows whether the aspect ratio of the selection will be maintained. It's a linked chain, (to show the ratio is not maintained); it acquires two tags at the ends to show when it is maintained. To me, this doesn't work: a linked chain says that the width and height are linked; I would expect to see a broken chain, to show they're not linked and the aspect ratio is not maintained.

The export dialog box gets closer: a locked padlock shows the ratio between height and width are linked, an open padlock shows they're not linked. But why a padlock? To me, that suggests they're locked to a fixed value and can't be altered at all.

I think it would be clearer (and more consistent) if in both Transform Pane and Export dialog a graphic of a linked chain (with tags at the end, if you wish) showed that the aspect ratio is maintained, and a broken chain showed it was not.