DGee

Thanks @DGee,
Looks like there is a bug with the .PSD clipping mask import with smart objects, we do have this logged with the developers so i'll bump it with your report.

Thanks for the additional clarification.
I will check again tomorrow, PC is in sleep mode already.

Right, I'm, not sure I could do that because it's a psd mockup that I don't own the rights to.
but here is the link to the file 
https://mockups-design.com/free-hoodie-mockup/

why is it always so complicated to check the release notes.... it makes no sense

why is it always so complicated to check the release notes.... it makes no sense

why is it always so complicated to check the release notes.... it makes no sense

I'm trying to leave the Adobe ship but it's a very difficult task. I can get over the many features missing in Affinity but the fact that PSD mockups open broken or look different in Affinity is a deal breaker. Hopefully I'm missing something and that´s the reason for this post...
BTW I have the import PSD smart objects option checked in preferences.
The main issues I'm encountering are:
1. In many cases layer masks won't import and I have to manually mask those in Affinity Photo
2. Gradient Fills won't translate even if those are not mesh gradients
3. Sometimes layer styles won't translate accurately. 
Even if I uncheck the import psd smart objects there are clear visible differences. This a serious problem.
Every mockup out there is made for Photoshop so if Affinity apps cannot properly open and render PSDs , they are not usable as a replacement for Photoshop in any professional workflow. This is a problem that has not been solved since Affinity Suite came out and to this day it has not been fixed, while there are free apps like Photopea.com that are able to open any PSD file and render it without issues... it's frustrating...
 
 
 

I agree, after using these apps for years and attempting a transition from Adobe at all costs, I have to say that I feel as if Serif lacks a clear vision to give professionals the basic tools they need to put out professional work in a timely manner. There are enough tools to create a colourful butterfly and share it with your pals on insta no doubt about that. But using these apps professionals has many caveats that could disappoint many clients. I think they need to rethink the very foundation of these apps in terms of workflow and get advice from people who are putting out work for big clients if they want to evolve into something that can become a real substitute for adobe apps without serious compromises that can have an impact on businesses.

This is probably my last post here as I've just paid for a whole year of Adobe Creative Cloud.
I really hate Adobe's subscription model and that's why I tried to build a professional workflow around Affinity apps at all costs over the past two years or so.
In the process I've spent / wasted countless extra hours dealing with the lack of basic tools such as optical kerning, warp effects (which is now a welcome addition in v2 though it still lacks behind Adobe's in many aspects) text view options (like hide cursor, hide text boxes, text edges that really slows you down), mesh / freeform gradients, lack of image tracing, lack of vector integration with after effects or apple motion, unreliable integration with Photoshop (unexpected changes in appearance that makes it unreliable in any professional workflow, good luck trying to edit a photoshop mock-ups) lack of 3rd party plugins, mockup incompatibility just to name a few.
In hindsight it was not worthy at all for me. I honestly cannot understand why Serif has not implemented basic stuff as variable font support, optical kerning or text view options when you have here people who has been asking for those basic features for many many years. It feels as if you don't care at all. When I use these apps, despite they all have amazing features, pack incredible technology under the hood, and have a lot of potential, it's a real struggle on many fronts. For me the final deal breaker was the lack of competitive text editing tools and the lack of optical kerning in particular. When you have to kern many texts daily it just makes zero sense. Maybe you should listen to your customers and probably get a top notch design consultant to guide you in building a truly competitive workflow for designers. You've probably build that workflow for illustrators, IDK as I'm not one but I'm afraid not for designers.
Good luck with everything, I'll check back in a year in hope that I can go back to using these apps. I would honestly love to see Designer evolve and become a true Illustrator killer.

+1,000,000 for optical kerning. Too long overdue.

I love the Affinity concept and made the switch from Adobe a few months ago. I bought all three programs (but have only installed Photo so far... guess I should have waited and bought the 2.0 bundle instead).

The only thing that is a real problem for me is the lack of optical kerning.
It might appear as a small thing to some, but this really makes text designs unnecessarily time consuming. And no, it's not just poor fonts that benefit from this.

I kept going with 1.0 because I wanted to give it an honest chance. Also, I was really hoping that this basic feature would be implemented in 2.0. Unfortunately it apparently wasn't a priority. This is the only reason why I am in doubt about updating - and consider switching back to a company I don't even like. Just because I the current workflow is too slow and uninspiring.

I'm crossing my fingers that this will be included in an update very soon (Photo, Designer and Publisher).

I would love to be able to become a long time Affinity user and supporter.
So many things are great with this company.

Yes, they will log the problems with their developers, but in the meantime I have to pay my subscription to Adobe because I am struggling to get professional results with the Affinity suite. It may take weeks to solve these problems, perhaps months or even years, and in the meantime I've spent 120€ for nothing. Besides, the PDF export problem seems to be a known bug, as this other user points out as a major problem with Affinity Publisher in this post:
I am just very disappointed by my experience with the Affinity suite, and not by small details, but by the presence of fundamental problems, such as lags, crashes and basic import/export problems, and I wonder how people manage to work with this softwares.
(BTW The CMU font problem is only partially a font problem, the double quotes are still rendered incorrectly in Publisher)

YES - WE NEED OPTICAL KERNING! Affinity Publisher is not a useful program until it has OPTICAL KERNING. And Optical Kerning also in Affinity Designer, of course!

I'm new to Publisher and while I've been really impressed by it generally, I'm massively disappointed that there doesn't appear to be an optical kerning feature? I noticed several other (albeit older?) threads on here regarding optical kerning so I hope I'm right in saying that it currently isn't a feature on v1.9 and I've not been going mad looking for something that's hidden in plain sight?
Optical kerning is the one thing stopping me from swapping from Indesign to Publisher completely as it's a feature I use so often. Not everyone wants to manually kern every project (not every project needs it) and it's even more of a pain when you're not working in English.
I really hope they implement it soon, it doesn't really compete with Indesign without it.
(Also does anyone from Serif ever see the forums?)

Sehr traurige Einstellung. Trifft wahrscheinlich auch auf die Klimaänderung zu. 
 
It is the same argument: Serif publishes half-baked stuff. Every time we see that “AFFNTY” on top, we can’t believe it.

And we even don’t want to discuss other apps here. We want a solution that works for all. Really stupid, that you have to create thousand of values that an algorithm could do. This is not a feature for most users. We will see more and more bad margins because users think it works. Terrible, that one presents such a thing here at all: the C optically too far outside, the N too far right, the kerning completely ill.

We don’t want to discuss your best option, kerning and editing hundreds and thousand of values, that would be needed, but it shows that you even had no time to bring the “A” and the “E” on one optical line. Your picture shows that the manual options don’t work for many users: there is no correct optical margin alignment!

All the pictures show that even users that seem to know what they do, do not get correct results.

Mike even had no time to set only four letters visually correct. So how should this be economical, if you have to work out huge tables for every font, every used letter and finally different styles and sizes?! Impossible! Especially not for laymen. This optical alignment does not work in real life! (The letters are not even based on pictures and graphic elements that are in the grid.)

But you call it optical alignment, but it is not a bit of that. Laymen think that it works correctly.
Hoped the letters would at least be oriented to the outer margins and Serif would do it properly and better than others. But even that does not seem to have been implemented. So texts are too far inward in APu.

It is the same issue: Serif, which ran into many problems because developers seems to be not informed about basic graphic knowledge.

Font means that we use numbers from the font file, if available, otherwise we fall back to the Manual numbers. In practice very few fonts actually define optical alignment, so there's no difference between Font and Manual. We hope that Affinity will encourage font designers to add this feature to their fonts. In the meantime you can set your own numbers in the same text style that sets the font face. (No change is a text style option which means the style either inherits its setting from the style its based on, or else does not affect the text it is applied to at all.)
In theory it is possible to do automatic optical alignment (or kerning), based on the geometry of the glyphs. I think this is what Oval wants. We have no current plans for this.

I agree, after using these apps for years and attempting a transition from Adobe at all costs, I have to say that I feel as if Serif lacks a clear vision to give professionals the basic tools they need to put out professional work in a timely manner. There are enough tools to create a colourful butterfly and share it with your pals on insta no doubt about that. But using these apps professionals has many caveats that could disappoint many clients. I think they need to rethink the very foundation of these apps in terms of workflow and get advice from people who are putting out work for big clients if they want to evolve into something that can become a real substitute for adobe apps without serious compromises that can have an impact on businesses.

I agree, after using these apps for years and attempting a transition from Adobe at all costs, I have to say that I feel as if Serif lacks a clear vision to give professionals the basic tools they need to put out professional work in a timely manner. There are enough tools to create a colourful butterfly and share it with your pals on insta no doubt about that. But using these apps professionals has many caveats that could disappoint many clients. I think they need to rethink the very foundation of these apps in terms of workflow and get advice from people who are putting out work for big clients if they want to evolve into something that can become a real substitute for adobe apps without serious compromises that can have an impact on businesses.

this is amazing man

Hi there!
Stumble upon an video that demonstated how to colorize black and white pictures…
He used an site called palette.fm, this use AI to colorize, take this new colorized pictures into Affinity Photo and use this in blend mode ’Color’ to get the color information to the hiresolution black and white pictures…