cygaj

I have been active, pushing for this feature, in an old thread for V1 sadly named "Gradient tool is awful". I'm sorry that the Gradient Tool is still "awful" (it of course isn't, it's just a separate tool from the one we want to use) To all people who prefer a nondestructive tool: no one is advocating to take it away. We just want an alternative destructive tool for a faster workflow. There is plenty of use cases when your description of "real life" doesn't actually apply. I want to be able to work with multiple gradient strokes while masking, as if with a brush. Not every application demands fiddling and readjusting before accepting the result (and taking multiple steps to flatten the layers). Many different approaches exist to any task at hand and the program should facilitate more of them. When I was most desperate about the issue was before I got an ipad to paint on and changed my entire digital painting workflow. Back when I was painting in photoshop on desktop I was using the gradient tool exactly in the way OP presented in their video (combined with selection tools). You can find my own video in the old thread I linked above, or I'll just attach it to this post actually, here, below. I don't know anything about software development but the existence of the gradient tool at all suggests to me that adding a destructive variant wouldn't be a big deal. Adding another item to a dropdown menu (that already exists for the tool) like in the photoshop example above wouldn't be an "application bloat". This is supposed to be professional software, not a casual application that sacrifices usability for making things as clear as possible for an occasional user. The insistence for users to be forced to work with non-destructive tools in a raster graphics program, against their own will, is very troubling for me. It feels like being told by developer "I know what is best for you". Also affinity still has problems about not remembering tool settings, including gradient colors, but this is more a global issue I guess. btw: to loukash, I'm sorry I haven't properly read your fill layer solution. This issue is not something I'm struggling with atm, I just wanted to add a post to a V2 thread because I've been advocating for this in V1. But I when I see there are multiple layers involved that tells me the issue is still there. (also thank you for making this thread, OP) gradient.mp4

I am aware of that but it is very good you're mentioning it in case someone missed those buttons but is also struggling with the tool and tries to find a workaround (until the issue is hopefully addressed because even with a proper mouse this arrangement flies in the face of ergonomy)

Operating LMB while holding RMB down to add to selection is very straining and awkward. Couldn't it be changed to for example Shift or… why aren't modifiers editable in the first place? I'm sorry for making a new topic. The most fitting one about such subject was in V1 feedback forum and I would like to give feedback to V2 keywords in case someone tries to find a topic like this: right mouse button click add selection keyboard shortcut affinity photo V2

That is very informative and changes everything! Wouldn't have occurred to me that the grayscale I perceive on the mask isn't that in reality. Thank you for pointing this out to me Unfortunately I'm too out of depth to follow these instructions because I don't know how to work with channels at all. My experience with Photo is mostly retouching scans and making tweaks to them with adjustment layers and this problem was more complicated than what I usually need the program for. So I was confused what is the "masking position" and whether I should have a mask in place already and how to nest all the things, I didn't know how to follow your instruction to achieve any effects, I'm sorry haha. But! I googled specific phrases you used and stumbled onto this thread: Using channel mixer for masks I tried following the instructions and they seem to do what I wanted to do (image in attachment) Does your method, that I couldn't work out, does something more than this? Or are the instructions in that post equivalent? Maybe I could've work out your instructions but the truth is I should be doing something completely different right now, I only made this thread because I got really distracted with a problem I shouldn't worry about right now, and when I sobered up from the distraction I don't want to fall down the rabbit hole of learning about channels from scratch, but I also wanted to acknowledge the help I am being offered By the way: my actual problem is that I'd like to do some designs for screenprinting and this is my uninformed layman's idea for how to go about color separation. But I need to search the forum later for workarounds that people figured out especially for this usecase EDIT: I imagine that this is a bad idea in general and I'm at a loss how to use Affinity to design an image for printing in colors different than CMYK. From what I understand I'd want to use custom channels

This should be very simple but I absolutely can't figure out how to make a live filter to work on a mask. I have the same problem with adjustment layer on a mask either. I just don't know what I'm doing wrong but I can't seem to get it to do anything (Affinity Photo 2.0.3 on win10)

Thank you for responding! It does make certain sense, since it can't go between pixels. Would then the best way to measure a length in the image in other units be using a let's say a rectangle shape? There's no measuring tool in Photo, right?

I set measurements units other options while in View Tool but when I switch to any Marquee or Freehand Selection tool it's stuck to px in the Transform box and I don't know how to change it. While using every other tool (that I checked, I wasn't very through) it uses units as selected in View Tool. Happens in a new document operating system: Windows 10 hardware acceleration: on

Sorry to not have been more precise! I meant area "A" EDIT: Of course when talking about presets it would be beneficial to be able to pick any color of course, not only white-to-black grey. But what's most needed for me is to be able to switch between presets quickly

I would love to be able to change interface's background color as easily as in Photoshop and actually have presets. I often want to switch between white and grey. I need to see images with white backdrop whenever I prepare them to be displayed online on a white website. But it's always a hassle to get into find preferences in a dropdown menu, go into right tab, and then slide a slider. In photoshop you rightclick background and choose a preset (several levels of grey and or a custom color)

I would like to +1 this thread because I also bump onto this quirk often. I crop scans of paintings and the edges aren't perfect so I'd like to crop zoomed in onto specific segment. It's quite annoying that I can't do that, especially coming over from photoshop. Also, even zoomed out it would be way more straightforward to just grab on the edge, and not needing to grab onto a small handle EDIT: I apologize! I found this thread on google and forgot to double check it refers to Designer, not Photo. I have the problem in Photo. But it still stands!

I stopped replying to this thread before because I didn't want to waste my energy and I felt like I'm not going to convince the other user. But I'm glad that others started posting here again and just wanted to add that I can't take seriously the idea that adding a functionality isn't important because you can achieve the same effect in just couple seconds more. It's simply ridiculous. Imagine if the program shipped without any keyboard shortcuts and people asking for them were told that they shouldn't demand Photoshop features and that they can simply choose everything they need from a dropdown menu. Imagine if you needed to confirm every brush stroke and merge it to a layer below before making a new one, after reselecting the color because the tool won't remember it, that is My needs for a raster editing application are (relatively) modest. I don't even paint on desktop anymore, ever since I got an ipad, and I only need Affinity Photo for editing my scans now. So I can live with it's shortcomings if it means I don't need to be Adobe customer, it is greatly appreciated. And it's perfectly natural that AP has less features given it's age. But many people who work in Photoshop for a living can't make the jump because of little gaps in functionality like these impeding their workflow to a great extent. All those "seconds" add up. And in the absence of destructive gradient tool you simply can't use it as all for many things you would want it in a photo editing program, it's a no go

What's wrong with knowing there are more efficient way to do some things and wishing they were possible in a general raster editing program that tries to compete with the monopoly? And how you preferring a tool that is included from the one that is being asked for is relevant to the implementation of the latter? It's not about the "new", it's about different tools being useful for different applications. Is it great that Affinity isn't trying to be a Photoshop clone and goes for new solutions? Yes it is! Is the feature discussed in this thread basic and missing? Also yes, very much

Hi, I tried to google how to make tools forget the colors I'm using them with. Is there a setting for this I can disable? I found this thread on accident. How can I use a brush and then switch to fill bucket and not have the selected color change to the one remembered by the bucket? EDIT: Okay, I'm sorry, now I understood these were primary and secondary colors getting selected, not separate colors for each tool!

That is a helpful hint, thank you!

Needed to reset password to this account only so I could bump this thread because I am almost crying trying to make a selection right now. I've tried to make a rectangle and convert it to curves and make a selection out of them but I'm failing at the selection step, don't know why, will investigate, but also I feel that I really shouldn't have to do this to make a fixed ratio selection! EDIT: I wasn't getting a selection because I made the rectangle fill transparent (to actually be able to select something with it). I don't understand it but at least I know the workaround. Still, it is a bad workaround, I can't set a fixed ratio to a rectangle either. As it is I need to, as far as I understand: 1. draw a rectangle 2. make it transparent so I can see 3. type in ratio as W and H 4. resize to desired size holding while holding shift 5. make the fill opaque again 6. convert to curves 7. convert to selection. It's so bad…

These are both very important things Also I don't know if this thread is right to have color selection docker suggestions but I would love to be able display color wheel and sliders at the same time

I want to second everything mentioned above

I'm very sorry for resurrecting this thread, I was trying to find something more about gradient tool in Affinity and I ended up googling "affinity gradient tool is awful" and it brought me here. This is the thread I made myself several days ago in the help forum section: But OP in this thread is way better at explaining with words what I expect of a gradient tool in a raster editing program. I made this video of making scribbles to demonstrate how important is a regular destructive gradient tool with a foreground-to-transparent setting to me video: https://mega.nz/file/3MlAGC6J#QzXnfSnQ4TtOBVoMnjCmDMgI0kFuNzZS-MAy5GYFvgQ In this thread I talked about how I probably have to live with it and accept it not being available or use another program for painting. But after looking at some options I really wish I could be using Affinity. But why oh why does it not have the basic gradient tool? I don't know anything about programming but as was already talked about in this thread and how I imagine, the guts of such tool are already in the existing tool, the whatever code that makes the gradient render. It's just a matter of making an alternate tool that is destructive to the currently active raster layer by doing the merging and stuff I beg whomever can respond to this, please, please implement a normal gradient tool in your raster image editing program, please! *DIRE*

In all seriousness tho, how likely is a regular ol' classic gradient tool with a foreground-to-transparent setting to be implemented in Affinity Photo? Is it something that I should look for in the feature suggestion forum if it really isn't in the program now?

Okay, I got the recording using windows built-in soft. So, this is just scribbles to demonstrate why the speed is the only issue here, not the final effect. From what I understand this is just not possible in the Affinity right now because I imagine it was designed with more control and less rapid editing of the pixels in mind and I'll live with it. I will likely end up using a different program for painting, one that have a more traditional gradient tool in them and stick to affinity for image manipulation / touch ups / preparing for print. But I need to play around more and see about that yet link to video: https://mega.nz/file/3MlAGC6J#QzXnfSnQ4TtOBVoMnjCmDMgI0kFuNzZS-MAy5GYFvgQ

The problem isn't achieving the effect, i would just merge the layers if that was the point. The problem is doing it very rapidly, least steps possible. I work gesturaly and fast. Maybe I'll try to record what I have in mind later but I need to install some soft for it first. Also I think your video is the answer to the opposite of my problem actually in the first place. I think I need to record a video because maybe I'm being unclear with words :•)

(tagging @Callum because your signature says to do so!) Thank you so much for going through the trouble of recording this. Unfortunately it doesn't solve my problem because the issue is that by making the gradient transparent you're effectively removing pixels of the layer with the gradient (if there were any in the first place) and making the layer transparent in that area, instead of just throwing the gradient in the same layer without replacing it with the gradient completely. What I mean is this and the key part is that (this is screencap from photoshop) this was made in a completely flat document, there was no working with layers in the slightest to get this [attached image] I'm still working in Photoshop because I still have the subscription and it makes sense for me to use the program I'm used to when I have lot of work to do, but I've bought Affinity during the sale and I will try to play with it more when I get the chance. I think at this point my solution will be to either create some sort of action that would achieve what I want, if that's a possibility in this program or… just accepting that this is not part of affinity toolset and I don't get to use gradients like that when I paint in this program. Tools shape the workflow and I think it is a good think because that creates a variety and makes your brain work differently. I can also explore other alternatives to Photoshop for painting purposes but I also need Affinity because not only I paint digitally but I also process scans of my paintings and for that I need an actual photo manipulation software But I won't say that it's gonna be a little sad for me if it turns out that my photoshop workflow is unique to that program and that I need to give it up for good when I quit Adobe. But I think I might not have to, I just need to explore all the free/affordable alternatives and learn what they offer

Hello, In Photoshop in my painting process I use gradients a whole whole lot. I rely on them applying snappily, with a single click-drag-release, and with the basic setting of foreground-to-transparent. I make selections, either with wand or lasso or whatnot, and throw in the gradient, and deselect. From what I've managed to see so far from gradient tool in Affinity the level of control seems to be useful for photo editing but… absolutely useless for my workflow. Is there any way to use gradients quickly, using the current active foreground color instead of a swatch, and to apply them to existing raster layer with transparency settings working within it (the way that if my gradient has transparency it just leaves the pixels in the layer visible, and not make them transparent and show the layer below)? Or is it I have to completely forget about using gradients for what I use them now if I switch over from Photoshop?