fjunk

This is how it's done in Illustator: If copyright is the issue, then how about, at least, a tooltip? If a picture is worth 1000 words, then words might at least be worth a few brain cells (of memory). Here's how dots are done in Affinity Designer (which mirrors how it's done in Illustrator. But, again, you have to practice it and remember it. The less I, or anyone else, has to go somewhere else to find the answer: Illustrator included, is that much more time that can be dedicated to designing. There are those for whom this is no big deal. For me, the less I have to remember the better. I have a pretty decent memory, at 68. That doesn't mean I look forward to yet another thing to have to remember. And, these days, every day, that's a lot. Add to that every other program (Blender for example is shortcut intensive). Don't want to, there are far more expensive alternatives. Affinity Designer, is truly a bargain, for what it does, how well it does it, and for the price. Doesn't mean there's not room for improvement. Thanks.

"A picture is worth a thousand words." (Or numbers, even if only a few).

That it may be, but, it's been true since forever: "A picture is worth a thousand words." Here considerably fewer. But, why ask people to think that hard, which admittedly isn't, when you could give them a drop down list of choices (as well, perhaps for those who want the additional mathematical customization). When something simple is desired, in the grand scheme of things, that's a lot easier than working out the math. Maybe even some way to macro the method so as not to have to repeat it. I know there's a way to copy styles. Maybe, I missed it, and that applies to dashed or dotted lines as well. Still, nothing beats point and click.

Yes. It works similarly in Inkscape.

Fine. I'm not happy about it, but won't quibble about it. The rest of my comment I posted to suggestions for improvement. As it is, I can do what I want, quicker and easier in Inkscape.

Instead of playing math with strokes (or logic, take your pic) how about a simple dropdown list of example possibilities to choose from, comparable to Inkscape? The option can still be there for those who want or need to play with the numbers. For those of us just looking for a SIMPLE dotted or dashed line of one kind or another, there would be that. Or, maybe better yet, just combine the two ideas, still provide the numerical examples, but, alongside the examples, as explained above. Like, idunno, Styles, or QuickFX. Something we're already used to. Maybe?

From a video a year ago: A year ago, yes, the word "Dash" not the function itself. Based on the video, I was looking for the visual cue - ie, the word. At least in the video it's there. Not on my Mac.

Mac, Sonoma, Laptop

Done.

There used to be a very visible indicator of what this does "Dash". It's missing in 2.2. Always used it? Know what you're looking for and where? Not a problem. Also, in addition to playing math with strokes (or logic, take your pic) how about a simple dropdown list of example possibilities to choose from, comparable to Inkscape. The option can still be there for those who want or need to play with the numbers. For those of us just looking for a SIMPLE dotted or dashed line of one kind or another, there would be that. Or, maybe better yet, just combine the two ideas, still provide the numerical examples, but, alongside the examples, as explained above. Like, idunno, Styles, or QuickFX. Something we're already used to. Maybe?

Ok, I've looked at everything except Publisher. Even as Publisher's explained, that I can tell, the patterns are within a square. PaintStorm Studio and Procreate work predominantly with bitmaps and leave little room for designing outside the "box". VectorStyler comes closest to Illustrator, has many creation and customization options. I tried playing around with dynamic changes and that didn't work so well for me. Affinity Designer has videos, as does Illustrator and Procreate. VectorStyler could benefit greatly from more Youtube videos. A thousand words really doesn't compare to a show'n'tell video. Haven't looked in the VectorStyler Forum yet. I don't think, maybe I'm wrong, would like to be, that Affinity Designer for that matter can create Styles or Presets, in Designer's case, I guess, swatches for Seamless Patterns. Vector Styler can. Seems VectorStyler ($ 99 when I bought it. Even that compared against an Illustrator subscription is cheap.) and Designer would make a complementary team, but, VectorStyler is not as friendly as Designer. Nor does it have the long history, tutorials, videos, and user base that Inkscape does. I like tinkering with it for it's filters, blends - comparable to Illustrator, and Seamless Patterns - also comparable to Illustrator. Could prove useful for laying down a pattern, exporting it into Designer and playing around with it there as well. VectorStyler Patterns documentation: https://www.vectorstyler.com/documentation/patterns/ Symbols, Styles and Presets: https://www.vectorstyler.com/documentation/symbols/ Blends: https://www.vectorstyler.com/documentation/blending/ and Effects: https://www.vectorstyler.com/documentation/shapeeffects/ VectorStyler has a Shape Builder Tool as well, but, I think Affinity Designer's is better. Programmatic vs Procedural, when done right, and Illustrator certainly seems to have a corner on that market, can be a real productivity boost that doesn't get in the way of creation. Vector Styler and Inkscape both do well in that regard. The G'Mic tool for Gimp is another step in that direction for bitmaps. I haven't been able to get it to work on my Mac, but Krita has it built in (and working) on a Mac. Just some other possibilities.

This is from CS6, back as far as 2012. With Affinity it's more a procedural process. By comparison, Adobe Illustrator has programmed it and created a menu for the process. Less heavy lifting, easier to implement, easier to change.

The process in both Procreate as well as Affinity is Labor Intensive compared to Adobe Illustrator. And changing from one means Brick to Hexagon (for example) to another is much simpler. There are more options available at a click. Trying to get to the same points in Affinity Designer OR Procreate is just a far more labor intensive process. For AI, for that matter, this process goes back to 2012, CS6. Which means they've had it for awhile. Affinity Designer, to be fair, hasn't been out that long by comparison - 2018 vs 2012 (for the AI Seamless Pattern process currently in use). It can be done using Affinity Designer or Procreate, but, with AI, it's so much simpler, flexible. If you watch the video, it's readily apparent. It's not that it can't be done. It's that it can be done better. Just as with Shape Builder. Adding it to Affinity Designer made doing the same things that used to be done without it so much easier, simpler. Right now, it's a bit of a kludge. There's room for improvement.

Ok, I've looked at Procreate's process: https://catcoq.com/blog/how-to-make-a-seamless-pattern-in-procreate it's comparably labor intensive.

Affinity Designer could do better: Adobe Illustrator (2 months ago (Recent)): Not sure how Procreate does it or how it’s better than or just as good as Affinity Designer (for the iPad). What Adobe Illustrator shows is that it could be much better. I realize fully that it’s not the tool that makes the difference, it’s the user. And, I’m not much of a user. That being said, better tools make for better use regardless of the user. Flint and wood shavings worked just fine before matches and matches before lighters. A better tool might not make ineffective users that much better overnight. It would make the process a lot easier. And, that would make good users, great users, and users like me, would make their lives easier in the process. Adobe Illustrator demonstrates what could be. And if they’re doing it, that means copycats could do it as well. Probably not the same way, copyright and all that, but, better, their own way. In the meantime, there’s what currently works with Affinity Designer. But, if they could do shape builder, they can do better seamless tiles. And better seamless tiles would improve process and quality. A good thing, yes?