JCP

Looks good....please post the final.

@Bassthang I drew two shapes similar to yours....grouped them together. Then coped over the curve set from the SVG file. Cracked curves on top layer worked better than below like I first suggested as the Divide command seems to divide both sets of layers but subtracts from the bottom layer. Your Affinity Designer UI looks a little different, are you on v1? Maybe that's the difference.

@Bassthang Found this broken glass SVG here as a free download. https://www.dxfdownloads.com/broken-glass-free-svg/#google_vignette Copy the svg into your Designer file as a layer. Drag it below your artwork. Select both layers then the Divide command. Then you can delete and rearrange the pieces Layer mask and brush "Textures \ Grunge Pattern 04" has nice cracked effect.

No I've narrowed it down to the FX "3D" effect. I uncheck it and it works. The Drop shadow FX is still applied.

This seems to be related to the shapes having FX applied them. If I remove the FX......it exports as a curve.

When exporting to PSD, the option imply that certain elements such as curves would be maintained. But not matter what I select, all objects get converted to pixel layers when I reopen the PSD in Photo or Gimp. Is there no option to export work in Affinity Designer such that the export can remain editable?

And they lock the format to lock users in to their software environment, which should be illegal. All files should be an open readable format. It's doable, look at the PDF format, it's mostly open and documented and look at how much competition there. There are dozens of PDF editors from small programs that do simple merging to programs more capable than Acrobat, like Bluebeam. Affinity can read PSD but they must be reverse engineering the file format and its not perfect.

This is an issue across the board with a lot of software companies, especially with those that dominate the market due to incompatibility between competitive software and file type lock in. They no longer release enhancements and changes that are compelling enough for the customer base to pay for the "upgrade". Subscription allows them to justify their existence when they no longer deserve it. I wouldn't be as opposed to subs if file types and the data was completely open. File content should not be proprietary so it can easily move between applications. This would allow more competition to exist and keeping pricing options open and fair. Imagine buying Dewalt tools but all the work you do with them can't be "edited" with Black and Decker tools.....that's what Adobe and other companies essentially do.

This is happening with a lot of software. The tools have matured and there is little they can add that existing customers will pay to upgrade. It gets more difficult for them to come up something new so lets just switch to subs to try and continue to justify their existence. Imagine if you bought a Dewalt drill and if you had to activate it annually for it to work. No one would accept that, but for software we do, or have little choice other than to try an go elsewhere. Not always an option when that software has a near monopoly on the market.

Well worst cases is we have 2 or 3 years still as it would take time a new version for them to move to subscription only model. I think voicing dissent is the way to go so they know the impact.

I hope this doesn't end up like Bluebeam Revu did. It was a perpetual license with optional "maintenance" for annual upgrades. Then it got purchased by Nemetschek. The next version (21) was subscription only and a massive price increase. We went from a $300 initial purchase with $80 a year maintenance per user to $400 per year. Do the math on 500 users, although they have "graciously allowed us to be grandfathered in on existing users at a 10% annual increase until we reach full price. License agreement does allow us to use the older version forever.....however they have been shutting down the ability to activate older licenses. So you are fine until you want to move the software to a new PC, you can no longer deactivate and reactivate. I will say the difference here is that Bluebeam is mostly superior to Adobe Acrobat in its toolset. We even considered going to Acrobat as it was now a cheaper subscription but we lost too many tools that affect productivity. Not certain that's the case with Affinity. I'm a casual/hobbyist user, if they go subs I'll keep what I have as long as possible. If I have to sub in the future, it better be much less than Adobe's subs.