JamieL

OK. I found the problem. I changed the lines and the rulers to mm. Then I enlarged the lines so that I could measure them to 1/1000 mm. Then I could see that there is no problem with the program. The problem is with my laser printer. It can't detect some changes in width. I'll have to call Brother and ssee what they can offer. Yes - there were some other dashed lines. I'm checking for them as I go. Thanks, JamieL

I've had a problem with some lines printing with a larger width than other lines, even though the settings are the same. Some of them were two lines superimposed on each other. Gear Maker suggested double clicking on the thumbnail, and turning off the visibility of the layer and then seeing if something is left. The screenshot you have attached is the result of doing that. Of course, if I delete the blue path, I've deleted the object. So I'm back to the problems of why some lines are so wide and why a small change from a width of 0.17999 to 0.18 can cause a large jump in printed width. Any ideas?

Thank you for the suggestions. I'm going to look for double lines. One problem that I have and don't understand is the change in line width with a change in the settings. The first copy of my document has the bottom line on the upper diagram (under the letter 'F'') with a width set at 0.1799999. It prints as a fine line. The second copy of the document has the same line with a width setting of 0.18. It prints with a width of about 0.19. Why would such a small change create such a difference in the result? How do I get an intermediate width? I have several sets of curved lines with barbed arrows next to them. I took out one of the arrows in one set for clarity and set the thickness for both arrows at 0.18. However, when printed, the arrow heads were much thicker than the shafts. I couldn't find any other barbs that coincided with them so it appeared that there was only one line, not two superimposed. Next, I double clicked on the thumbnail for one barb (please see the first screenshot) and then turned off the layer and was left with the blue path of the barb. But if I delete the path I've deleted the object and the path of the arrow shaft appears. I'm back to problems with line width again! Any suggestions you have are greatly appreciated! JamieL X-sec D-D' final BT flting, 0.0179999 12-1-20.afdesign X-sec D-D' final BT flting, 0.18 12-1-20.afdesign

I set all lines at 0.175 using the pen or pencil. Some are very thin, probably less than 0.1, while others are close to 0.2. I've checked all settings, like decimal points, etc. All settings match but the printed copy has both thin and thick lines. I don't know which will be thin or thick until I print the figure. I've asked the community. They've helped me wiith other things but thiis one remains unsolved. JamieL X-sec D-D' final BT flting, 11-29-20.afdesign

Thank you for the suggestions, Pšenda. I changed all three lines in the 'a) D-D'' section. After trial and error I set all three at 0.2 pt. I also reset the pressure to the lowest level. I checked the properties and noticed that the px width of the brush strokes were different so I set all of them to 1 px. That affected the line widths as well. I redrew the three lines using the line mode and the shift key (thanks for the tip!). Once I was sure that all three lines had the same settings, I printed it. The vertical line at the E end and D-D' are the same width but the vertical line at the W end is still very thin. I can't find anything else to adjust. I'm still working on the layout of the cross sections and haven't decided if I'm going to use portrait or landscape, hence the slight rotation and things like the scale that run off the edge. Things like that are a work in progress, but I'm glad to now know how to do a rotation. My top two priorities are laying out the first stage of each of the three cross sections and figuring the problem of the printed line widths, A width of 0.2 is good for the cross-section. I've used 0.15 to 0.18 on an earlier version of the manuscript I submitted for other itmes and it worked well and has been accepted by journal publishers. But every figure is different. I'll deal with that once I can draw lines of consistent width. JamieL X-sec D-D', 11-10-20.afdesign

Psenda (my wife is Slovak and we would like to know how to put the accent mark above the 's' in your name), Please find attached the file I'm working on, fig. 'a)'. I'm not worried about fig b) until I understand how to do fig. a). Please ignore the numbers above the D-D' line - they refer to map coordinates and will be deleted after all of the cross sections are complete. I didn't realize that the figure I sent you had been rasterized. The attached file was draged from the folder on my PC where I save all of my figures. Thanks, JamieL X-sec D-D'.afdesign

Thanks. i chose 4 decimal places for the line D-D' and the two vertical markers and a width of 0.25 pts (top figure). The vertical markers changed to 0.25 but the D-D' line didn't change. Attached is a screen shot of a scan of the figure. The figure at the bottom is an earlier attempt. In both there is an inconsistently when the settings are all the same. This puzzles me! JamieL Scan2020-11-08_211526.pdf

OK. I'm slowly learning how to do things, like take a screen shot. I'll make sure I use the same thread in the future. In the image you will see a horizontal line that is 0.2 pt wide. The two short vertical lines at the ends are also 0.2 pts wide. The preferences are set at 1 decimal pt. However, when printed, all three lines are very thin, probably 0.1 pt. On another set of lines, copied from this one with the width changed to 0.35 pt and 2 decimal places in preferences, the horizontal line is 0.35 pt but the veritcal ones look to be about 0.1 or 0.15. Thank you very much, Pšenda, for your assistance and patience. JamieL

I wrote a day ago asking how to set the width of lines. I received a very clear explanation that I was able to follow. However, some lines had the new width while other lines didn't change. I checked the width indicated both at the top of the window and at the right side of the screen. They are identical, e.g., 0.2., which is what I had chosen. I checked the number of decimal places for each line and they were correct. However, when I printed the document, some or all lines didn't change as I said. I feel that I'm missing a step somewhere. Can you assist me? JamieL

Got it! Thanks! I never would have figured that out without your assistance. JamieL

I have tried adjusting the line width when using the pen tool, both with and without the pressure settings. I find that I can get values like 0.1 pt, 0.2 pt, 0.3 pt etc. However, I need intermediate values like 0.15 pt. How do I make this change?

Problem solved by unclicking 'Hide Studio' in View/Studio. Thanks, JamieL

Lost all layers and other boxes on Windows screen after closing the lid and reopening it 5 minutes later. How do I turn them on again? I tried saving the document and restarting Affinity but still can't turn things on except for ruler on margins and tools. What do I need to do turn them on again? I'm a new user and am learning as I go. Thanks, JamieL