Jump to content

Fernan

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Fernan

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I just wanna share some thoughts about what Photoshop names "Cliping Masks". I've been using Affinity software for some months now, and I'm still kind of confused about them. I think the method to create them (dragging a layer "inside" another) and even the way they are displayed in the Layers panel could be changed to be less confusing. This is how Clipping Masks look in AP 1.8.4: It is nothing too bad, but I think Photoshop's way of displaying them is just better in several aspects: In Photoshop is just easier to quickly see where each Clipping Mask is and what exactly is doing. The Clipping Layer is directly above the base layer and have a unique icon (the little arrow) pointing below. When you see this little arrow, you just know there is some Clipping action going on there ๐Ÿ˜€ While in AP, when you start to have tens of groups and layers, things start to get a little more difficult to "read": I think this is like that because Clipping Masks and groups look almost the same (same arrow icon, same collapsive structure). IMO this should not be this way. You should not be able to expand and collapse a Clipping Mask just like you do with groups (in Photoshop you can't do that BTW). Sure, in AP when you have a layer with a bunch of "clipped" layers inside you can just collapse it, and this makes some "space" in your Layer panel instantly. I guess this is a little advantage. But at the same time, this makes harder to read and understand the Layer panel itself (when compared to Photoshop), because groups and Clipping Masks (layer with layers inside) look just the same. In Photoshop, if you have a layer with tens of clipped layers and you want to have more space in your Layer panel, you just group all those layers: After all, that's the purpose of groups, isn't it? ๐Ÿ˜ƒ While in AP, when you start to group layers with layers inside, and those layers have also layers inside, all the madness begins: I really think that getting the "inspiration" from Adobe Photoshop once again ๐Ÿ˜‰ will be the best for Affinity in this case. I propose something like this: IMO if the approach above was implemented, it would be a lot easier to understand what is going on in the Layer panel. Just to be able to tell apart groups and Clipping Masks in a blink, will make a big change. I hope this help. Sorry for my english ๐Ÿฅด
  2. In Photoshop they are the very same thing. Did you see that I was talking about Photoshop in my last reply? It looks like you missed that ๐Ÿ™„
  3. Yeah, that is what I did. Thanks. There is a nice feature in Photoshop though... you can convert any embedded document (Smart Object) into a LINKED file, so when you open it to make changes, you are actually editing a separate .psd file which exists in your computer. I guess there is not way to do that in APhoto, but that is another thing...
  4. Unfortunately it doesn't work in all cases. That turnaround doesn't work with the Divide button at all: And I guess there is not another turnaround available for dividing shapes in Affinity, so you just have to go to another software to make something that straightforward. Actually using Alt + Divide have the exact same effect as using Alt + Xor. I guess the Divide button should not have the option to create a compound...
  5. No, we do not have to pay for updates. Although I would LOVE there were an option to pay what you want as a way of supporting the development of Affinity tools... APhoto: https://store.serif.com/en-us/update/windows/photo/1/ ADesigner: https://store.serif.com/en-us/update/windows/designer/1/ APublisher: https://store.serif.com/en-us/update/windows/publisher/1/ I'm assuming you are using Windows.
  6. Is that possible? For example, I have a bunch of different layers (pixels, curves, primitive shapes and so on) in my document, and I want to convert them in an "Embedded document object". How can I do that? Is there something similar to Photoshop "Convert to Smart Object" command? Thanks.
  7. I created a New Round Brush to draw the outlines of a character. Really quickly I noticed that there is something weird with the way AP 'smooth' pixels (aka antialias) AP strokes (left) look so jagged and ugly compared to Photoshop (right). There is also this 'thing' when you are drawing curved lines, and you will get something that looks like a straight vertical or horizontal line (watch carefully at the zoomed images below): The same thing happen in AD when using pixel brushes. Is there any way to 'fix' that?
  8. It is better to forget about that, my friend. I really don't think that is going to happen in a near future... I guess you don't know, but even the few BASIC geometry operations that ADesigner have, are faulty (after so many years). See my topic about this: If the development team have not been able to fix that critical issue in all this time, then I think it is completely unlikely that we will have something similar to the Shape Builder Tool in the near time.
  9. Oh, is not possible for them to receive 'donations' from happy customers because they are an established company? Sorry if this is a silly question, but I have almost no knowledge on how all of this work in the UK (if this is where they are based). If that is the case, maybe an *optional* small fee at every update could be a good way of getting financial support from some customers. I don't know if that is not possible either ๐Ÿ™„
  10. Yo tambien pienso que seria buenisimo tener esa opcion... Pero mientras tanto, eso se puede hacer en Inkscape (que es gratuito).
  11. Hi all. I use some open source tools and like to do regular small donations to support the development of these programs. I want to start to make occasional donations to support the Affinity development team too, but I don't see any option that allows me to do that. I think it would be great to be able to do donations via Credit Card and/or Paypal. Is there any way to do that? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would like to just have the option to 'support the cause'. Btw, I know there is the Affinity Store too, but buying something (that I don't really need), is not a donation ๐Ÿ˜ƒ Sorry for my english.
  12. Oh man, this is kind of disappointing to read... I was not aware this software have these kind of issues. Geometry operators are TOO IMPORTANT in ANY vector program, so that is a pretty big problem ๐Ÿ˜” To be honest I have never experienced anything like that in any other software (CorelDRAW, Illustrator). Even in Inkcape (open source), which I really dislike, these operators work just as they should.
  13. Hi guys, I have found some issues while doing some basic geometry operations. This image is from 2 squares (and 2 examples) with a different rotation, after being Divide and then merged together again with Add operation: As you can see there are some edges that are overlapping. I made the same procedure several times and sometimes the result was different, but always problematic. I also found a very weird thing while using Divide operation in a more 'complex' geometry (4 circles). I was trying to follow along with an Adobe Illustrator tutorial about the Shape Builder tool (which is pretty neat), but this was the result ๐Ÿ˜” As you can see the Divide command gone insane. I have separated the resulting parts for you to see the problem more clearly; I ended up with more than 100 objects while expecting just 13 (most of them, in the form of tiny lines in the middle of the circles). Sorry if my english is not perfect. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.