ZufDraw

Also: is there a way to rename or reorder layer states ?

Assuming your document already is formatted with facing pages, you can double-click on any page in the Pages panel to jump the view to that page. If instead you double-click along the centerline of the spread, the view jumps to the 2 page spread.

Hi @ZufDraw,
No, you didn't miss anything. Currently there's no way to rename a layer state.
I'm checking to see if this is logged and will do so in case it's not.

The triangle button does not do that?

Are you on a mac? Looks different to my PC. 

Hi ZufDraw,
I've just deleted a reply (in case you got a notification).
I've just looked again and you're right - they ought to be on the right-side. Your expand/collapse arrow also looks different to mine.

I cannot understand why STATES didn't make into Designer. I hope it will be implemented soon.

Yes but it is by design. 100% Hardness in AP is very close to Pixel Tool and makes almost impossible to avoid "steps" with such a tiny brush.

You need to set 98% to have a smoother transition, or deal with a custom WE ramp.
You could also use Hardness Jitter.
 

Also the spacing thing.. The examples you showed explain the difference in line hardness. The ends being harder than the body of the line. However there are also just weird inconsistencies in play that cause seemingly random gaps/buildups in the lines.


Also, setting the curve as you suggested doesn't always eradicate the effect. I'm not sure where everything lies, only that it just feels wrong when drawing simple lines.

 

Also again... Forgot to mention.
Spacing is a variable value and can't be controlled yet.
This value is calculated starting from the Size of the Round shape, so in order to have a stroke like the one you showed here

 
you need to set Spacing equal to Shape percentage and as you can see below that dabs get closer (second stroke with 7 dabs)

Size Jitter ramp should be like this (for the reasons I've mentioned above)

Anyway being Spacing a variable linked to Size, it is not possible at this stage to completely mimic the Sketchbook/PS behaviour. 
We should have a Spacing Jitter and set a constant ramp there, otherwise with light pressure values (so small size) dabs will always be close enough to blend together.
This is why head and tail of the stroke look "dense".
 
 

Mmm...
 

 
 
This is hard to test... the 0% Shape produces artifacts.
Moving it back to 100% and increasing the hardness a little bit produces a smooth result on my side... This is a 200% zoom

 
Also a suggestion which is still a bit "hidden" and could explain why this engine works in a different way from CSP/PS.

 
Ramps work as multipliers, so if you create a 32px brush and set the ramp to the top right corner it will go from 0px to 64px.
The red circle is 64px, the first dot aside is done with full pressure and a ramp that ends in the middle.
The second black dot is the same 32px brush but with ramp ending end top right, and as you can see it is 64px wide.
My guess is that since shape is calculated in percentage from Pixel Size, it refers to 32px, so using "corner to corner" ramp together with shape ends in jagged lines. Not sure about the calculation... But with this insight I solved these sort of things.
Also with internal cycles (round and square brushes) you can use 1% spacing without problems and I strongly suggest to use this value in particular together with shape.
The only thing I still see is the "straight" starting point that occasionally happens.
About "straight" corners it could be an hardware/resources issue.. Which tablet are you using?
 
 

To show this non-linear relationship between Size, Shape and Pressure Ramp here you can see the preview of a brush with 0% Shape like your
Full Ramp

Half Ramp

Slightly lower than 1/4 of the Ramp

And this looks to me the expected result...

 
 
 

`I appreciate your efforts to also dive into this issue. I have tested this with various tablets and mostly cintiq's (5 different types). Please don't focus on the test line this is just some odd settings to illustrate something I found that probably causes the issues I experience with the lining. In the previous thread you can read this is a confirmed issue and was logged. I hope it will be addressed at some time. 

+1 for optical kerning

this issue still seems present in 1.8.3 is that correct? I tried all settings, bilinear, metal open gl, rendering still is jagged at certain zoom levels.
Also still issues with unsmooth lines (see second screen shot). I'm a sketch artist and don't want to use the stabiliser. I was hoping I could match the sketchbook pro feeling. 

Third issue is the pressure sensitivity, that is also not always smooth:
 
 

I love AF and it has replaced PS for me which says a lot as I have been using PS professionally for 20 years. But please fix the brush strokes and rendering and it will be perfect. 

There is an omission combination of the perspective/warp tool. Look at the image below. This was a simple 2d grid that I put in perpspective and lifted one corner. This is done in PS in two steps but is nearly impossible in AP. In photoshop you can freely transform the 2d grid image  (free transform) into the perspective, then, without applying, you can step to mesh warp. That mesh warp is now aligned to the perspective grid! Meaning the mesh warp points are on all four corners in the 3d grid. Now wou only need to lift one corner.
In AP perspective and warp are completely separate. As soon as I want to go to mesh warp, the perspective warp needs to be applied. Now the mesh warp starts in 2d view again meaning its impossible to warp the (already in 3d) grid.
I can use the warp tool from the start but that's really cumbersome. 
So what is needed here is a warp tool that can follow up on the perspective tool without a 'reset' of the selection in between. 
 
 
 

Yesterday was a watershed. I've used and taught Photoshop for 30yrs. I've used (professionally) Affinity Designer + Photo and now Publisher for 6yrs. Platforms iOS, and iPad. The Cloud obsession by Adobe is their death nell. Now not even their older versions are transferable due to not deregistering an app that no longer opens in iOS14. and 1 machine only. Family sharing with Affinity is a huge strength.
Affinity is the future as it puts its customers first. It's features are modern and not littered with outdated Effect Filters that you couldn't use without being laughed at (as PS are). 

No, AP isn't perfect yet (Image resizing...please. please sort it out when layers include .psd's) Corel's PSP had amazing algorithms...better than PS. Given that AP is Corel (as I understand it) get it sorted. AP, AD, APub. are professional packages and will move forward as  major app.'s.  Today I buy the WIN10 version (wish Affinity would give multi-platform discounts)  the end of the road for PS with me...and my students. Adobe's arrogance as being the best is folly as was Sony's BETAMAX. PS will go the way of Flash, Coldfusion, Dreamweaver, Premier (fading into history) and countless other failed Adobe products.
Affinity have got it right...and will work tomorrow and into the future...unlike Adobe.
 

Still an issue, I use this tool intensively but sooner or later it is impossible to copy the layer with the perspective filter.
I isolated one of my documents with this issue and it isn't even related to a group necessarily. Just try to copy this layer and you'll see what goes wrong. If I create a brand new rectangle and apply a perspective filter to that, it works fine. But the filter layer contains the copy bug used to contain a lot more content and it's beyond repair now. I even tried to save a duplicate version of the file and copy/paste layers between documents but the issue remains. 
 
BTW I'm on a Mac. 
AP 1.10.4
MacOS 10.15.7
 
 
 
Perspective filter copy bug.afphoto

Perspective Filter copy bug 2.mov

Honestly there isn't any argument or issues, just wanted to clarify what I meant. It's possible I had edited "Adobe can only claim to be...." to "Adobe can only be..." as I realised that Serif have never claimed to be an Adobe replacement and they needn't as it's an excellent app on its own. However, the label has been imposed on Affinity products, that's all.
As much as I love Affinity-I own all three apps, doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement or those who offer criticism should get verbally attacked with patronising or sarcastic comments. That user's frustration is genuine to them and for someone to just come along and dismissively ask them to create their own app is frankly rude and unhelpful. 
I think if users' issues were at least acknowledged that would be better - letting people know if its a consideration or not, where in the road map etc rather than just ignoring them. People are just frustrated by the absence of features they consider to be basic necessities which make their workflow more tedious and have been requesting for years. No arguments here just people voicing their opinions. Nice to see a moderator btw 🤓
 

+1

There is an omission combination of the perspective/warp tool. Look at the image below. This was a simple 2d grid that I put in perpspective and lifted one corner. This is done in PS in two steps but is nearly impossible in AP. In photoshop you can freely transform the 2d grid image  (free transform) into the perspective, then, without applying, you can step to mesh warp. That mesh warp is now aligned to the perspective grid! Meaning the mesh warp points are on all four corners in the 3d grid. Now wou only need to lift one corner.
In AP perspective and warp are completely separate. As soon as I want to go to mesh warp, the perspective warp needs to be applied. Now the mesh warp starts in 2d view again meaning its impossible to warp the (already in 3d) grid.
I can use the warp tool from the start but that's really cumbersome. 
So what is needed here is a warp tool that can follow up on the perspective tool without a 'reset' of the selection in between. 
 
 
 

+1 shortcut for mask to below plz

+1 shortcut for mask to below plz

Is there a possibility of allowing masking (Mask to below)  to have a shortcut on pixel via vector. That is Masking an image using a vector object?