iconoclast

Hi Gshooter! Can't say anything about Lens Profiles, but if you go to the "View" menu, there to "Studio Presets" and click on "Standard", you should get your original studio behaviour back, I think.

Hi Walt! Haven't noticed any problems like that with other websites in the last days. Only in this forum. And as I said, it seems to happen since the update. But since I posted the problem, it seems to be fixed. Will keep an eye on it.

Hi, since the update of the forum, I have problems replying to threads. After clicking "Reply to this topic", it always takes a verry time long until the post will be published. Sometimes it doesn't work at all. Also to transmit this post took at least 3 minutes.

As Joachim and Garry already said, some tools are sorted in small menus (identifiable by the small triangles on the bottom right corner of the tool symbols in the toolbar) related to what they are doing. F.e. the Blur and the Sharpness Tool affect the sharpness of the image area you apply them to. So they are sorted to the same menu to spare space in the toolbar. If you don't like the menus, you can open the "Customise Tools" panel (menu "View"), drag the small menus from the toolbar into it and drag the concerning tools directly into the toolbar, so that they are no longer sorted in menus. Verry convenient.

Um auch meinen Senf dazuzugeben: konstruktive Kritik ist natürlich okay und gut. Und auf Features hinzuweisen, die man vermisst oder gar für dringend nötig hält, ist natürlich auch okay und kann hilfreich sein. Dafür gibt es allerdings die Kategorie "Feature Requests & Suggestions", in der man sowas vorbringen kann und damit auch bessere Chancen hat die Entwickler zu erreichen. "Vermutungen" wie, dass Serif Adobe gehöre gehen allerdings über konstruktive Kritik weit hinaus und haben in der Tat eher den Charakter von Verschwörungstheorien. Ein positiver Effekt in Bezug auf die Fortentwicklung der Affinity-Software ist davon wohl kaum zu erwarten. Langer Rede kurzer Sinn: begründete Kritik, sachlich vorgetragen, ist sicherlich in Ordnung. Genöhle hilft aber niemandem. Und letztlich kann natürlich jeder, der Corel, Adobe oder sonstwelche anderen Anbieter besser findet, zu diesen greifen, wenn er will. Das muss uns dann hier nicht interessieren, denke ich.

OK, I can't say anything about the MAC-version. But I noticed a possible issue as I made some experiments with my Windows-version in the last minutes. As I replaced an Initial by a decorative version of the same character from the Glyphs panel, the first two characters were displayed in initial size - even there is just the first one character chosen as initial, in the Paragraph panel. Edit: This only seems to happen with one font (Wallington), so it doesn't seem to be a Publisher issue. Edit again: And as I found out, this behaviour can be changed in the Typography panel, with the Stylistic Alternates. I also noticed that, relating to the certain font I'm using, the initials sometimes appear a little weird. In case of the font Livorno Pro f.e., the initial appears on height of the the second and third lines, if 3 lines height is chosen. That is definitely font-related, I think. Seems I have to learn a bit more about Publisher. I just bought the Workbook. Think it will help.

Hi pummelfee! That's weird. I don't have this issue on Windows 10 with Publisher 1.10.4.1198. What Operating System and Publisher version you are working with? Does this happen with every font?

Or a white triangle, if you use the dark theme.

Possibly it it not in the Toolbar, but it should be available in the app. Go to the menu "View" and click on "Customise Tools" (at the bottom of the menu). A panel will open right of the toolbar. You should find the Smudge Tool in it. Just drag it into the toolbar and close the "Customise..."-panel. Then it should work. At least I hope so. Normally it should be available in the little menu in the toolbar where also Blur, Sharpen and Median Brush tool are available.

Hi LifeDoesn'tMatter! As far as I understand, you mean the pixelisation of the brush strokes, right? That is in fact a native problem of pxel images. The pixels always have to be so small, that means that the resolution of the image has to be so high, that they assemble to a smooth looking graphic, without aliasing. Images with higher resolutions allow smoother edges. But it is verry important to watch your images with a zoom factor of 100% (Original Size) to get a reliable impression. If you zoom in (f.e. 200%), the pixels will be displayed bigger and the edges will of course look more pixelated. If you are creating images that are meant to be published on the web, the images should have the size/resolution (pixels x pixels) in which they will appear on screen (on the website). If you create images that are meant to be printed, you should also take care that they have the right relative resolution, right from the start. The image size of digital images is measured in pixels horizontal x pixels vertical. If you have f.e. an image with a resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels, and your screen is set to this resolution, the image will fill the whole screen with its original size (100% zoom factor). But pixels don't have fixed sizes. F.e. Screens with the same resolution can have different sizes. So for print you need an additional value: the relative resolution that dedicates the pixels size to an analog dimensional unit. The standard resolution for print is 300 pixels per Inch. Take care that your images always have a big enough size and resolution for print, so that you don't need to scale them for it, because scaling always means a loss of quality (bluring or pixelisation). Hope that helps a little. Not sure if this is what you wanted to know.

Is there a "Transformation" panel (Studio) on the iPad? If so, you can activate the chain symbol between width and hight. It should fix that the layer will be transformed respecting the aspect ratio. At least I hope so.

Hi Josie! Try the Ctrl- or Cmd-key instead. I'm on Windows, so I'm not sure which one is the right on iPad. For me, on Windows, it works with Shift, if I drag the edges, with Ctrl, if I drag the corners. Edit: Bullshit, if you drag the corners, you don't need a key. If you drag the edges, Shift works. Sorry!

Not to forget, for the dirty texture, you can use a texture you like (you can find a lot of cool stuff at https://texturelabs.org/) lay it as a layer above the image and apply a blend mode to that layer.

Hi! Didn't watch the whole tutorial, but the basic thing of the effect seems to be a posterisation. So take a look at the "Posterise" filter in Photo. You could also try the "Threshold" filter. You will get a black & white image then. You can colorise it with the filter "Recolour". You have to increase the "Lightness" there to recolour the black areas. With the other two sliders, you can adjust "Hue" and "Saturation" of the wanted colour. But G'MIC is a verry fine plugin, I can recommend too. But this all will end up as a pixel image anyway. If you want to get a vector image, you could autotrace your image with f.e. the free vector graphics program Inkscape. Affinity Designer can't do this at the moment. The advantage of vector graphics is that you can up- and downscale them without a loss of quality.

Or Ctrl+1 or doubleclick the magnifier tool.

Could it be that the image on the right side of the layout has a Text Wrap setting that supresses the text on the left?

Hm, possibly a Mac-related issue? Can't reproduce it on my computer.

Hi seantjm! What app are you talking about? What OS? And how do you apply the outer shadow? With the Layer FX? I tried it in Photo, Publisher and Designer, and it didn't happen to me. I'm on Windows with the 1.10.3.1191-versions of the apps.

I had a similar problem with Publisher. It stopped actualising with an error. But after I clicked on the entry of Publisher in my library of the store, it started again and got completed. Seems to work now.

I think it's a bug. If you drag the point in the colourfield of Publisher's colourchooser to the top - so absolute white - all values of all CMYK-sliders turn to "0", except the Magenta-slider of the sliders on top: it has a value of "1". But this only seems to happen with the FOGRA 27 colour profile. Verry confusing!

In fact the help file says that you can export single categories. Not subcategories, as far as I see, and not the whole Assets. Here is the concerning text from the german Help file:

Hm, so ganz klar ist mir das noch nicht. Als Bibliothek mit Bildobjekten habe ich das Assets-Panel auch immer verstanden und es auch so benutzt. Wobei man aber wohl darauf achten sollte, dass man das Panel nicht zu voll packt, denn anscheinend kann man das Programm damit auch überfordern oder gar in die Knie zwingen. Was ist aber genau der Sinn dieser Funktion, um die es hier geht? Geht es einfach nur darum, dass der *.afpub-Datei die konkret verwendeten Assets auch nochmal quasi extern beigefügt werden (im Dokument sind sie ja schon drin), damit man sie zur Verfügung hat um sie im Zweifelsfall nochmal einfügen zu können? Z.B. wenn man die *.afpub an jemand anderen weitergibt? Würden sie dann auch auf einem anderen Computer im Assets-Panel erscheinen, wenn man das Dokument dort öffnet? Und wie ist das eigentlich wenn man Assets exportiert? Wird da immer der gesamte Fundus des Panels exportiert oder nur eine Kategorie oder gar Unterkategorie? Das habe ich bisher noch nicht rausgefunden.

Im Rahmen meiner Möglichkeiten. 😄

Ah okay, sorry, diese Funktion kannte ich noch gar nicht. Wieder was gelernt. 🙂 Ich schätze, thomasos Lösung müsste funktionieren: "Im aktuellen Dokument einbetten" einfach wieder abwählen.

Hi Andi, ich weiß nicht ob ich Dich ganz richtig verstehe, aber Du könntest sie im Ebenen-Panel suchen, dort jeweils auswählen und löschen (unter Windows mit der Entf-Taste. Wenn Du die Strg-Taste (Windows) gedrückt hältst kannst Du auch mehrere unzusammenhängende Ebenen auswählen und auf einmal löschen. Eine Funktion, die Assets im Dokument als solche identifiziert, wüsste ich nicht.