Fixx

That is not what HSL adjustment layer does. 
HSL adjustment currently only lets you "mask" based on hue. That's what the big circular color wheel thing is for. That way you can change what was a blue hue into a red hue, for example, while the greens and yellows remain unchanged. HSL adjustment, ever since a version or two ago, is a "replace color" tool in addition to a tool you'd use to boost saturation, change hue of image overall, and change lightness.
All of this is lacking one major thing though: the target color selection currently only lets you target a specific hue range. I want to specify not only a certain target hue range, but also a target saturation range and a target luminosity range. This would allow me to increase the saturation of desaturated areas in my photograph, for instance. Or it could let me decrease the saturation in the dark, desaturated yellow regions and no where else.  
In other words, the color range selection in HSL only has one variable: hue. I agree with Zeel, we should add one or two more variables to this feature.

In my mind bitmap layers should never ever be affected by non-decimal movement/placement. Bitmap pixel information must be maintained, and Affinity's behaviour is somewhat unacceptable. The user should not be forced to turn on pixel alignment to prevent the blurring of bitmap information.
With vectors and text this behaviour is understandable, and it is correct to have adjustable options how to render the pixels.  Not when editing bitmap layers, however. Pixels must be absolute, and not be affected by such settings.
Pixel alignment ought to be the 'default' behaviour, just as it is in pretty much any other image editor.

Epub are made of HTML, but it's a limited and specific HTML.
And the problems for visualization are the same as for browsers, not all applications respect or can display the full specification, for different reasons.

  
A good habit is not to use special characters as accented ones or punctuation, etc. in file name. And avoiding spaces too if the files are used for Internet/browser/epub… web based usages.

slchapin41:
Stick with Mojave as long as you can. I decided not to go with the Adobe CC product and kept my Adobe Photoshop CS6. Yes, 6! In any event, I did upgrade to Catalina and PS CS6 would not load. I talked to Apple and we decided my best bet was to revert to Mojave. After reverting, all hell broke loose. In addition, I was using Dr Browns Image Processor 2. To revert to Mojave, Apple walked me through the "re-install" from a clean drive. I'm not going to go into that one! Bottom line, Bridge stopped recognizing some .CR2 raw files. I tried a PS CS6 re-install. No help. In any event, After Installing the Adobe DNG Converter I was back in business. Somewhat slowed but back in business. Sooooo, long story-short stay with Mojave. Sorry to go a bit off topic but I felt it was knowing.

(...)

You can enter the desired page size in Document setup. Or you can export your artwork as selection only.
Transparent background is also set in Document setup, Colour tab.

It would help some people a lot if toolbars were customizable and those setups were saveable as presets. Aiffinity could even supply several setups for different tasks (preferably with panel setups – much like InDesign workplaces).

It would help some people a lot if toolbars were customizable and those setups were saveable as presets. Aiffinity could even supply several setups for different tasks (preferably with panel setups – much like InDesign workplaces).

Text handling. 

From my understanding these tools are going to be in Designer before the 2.0 release. I still want to share my input for how useful these tools are and are on the top of my wish list. I've added screen captures of my specific use cases for both. I look forward to Affinity's team doing an excellent job, much how they did with the live raster warping in affinity. Thanks to the team for giving us amateurs pro tools.

Dear Serif team,
after a decade solely with Adobe products, I switched to Publisher a month ago. I already tested the demo when it was first introduced and really wanted to get rid of Adobe for years, but I missed the IDML import feature that came with Publisher’s latest upgrade. I immediately batch converted all of my Indesign files with a script and dropped my CC subscription. With no regrets. I’m a freelance typographer and graphic designer focused on print media and I think Publisher is the better software here. Especially when considering it is not backed by a billion dollar company.
Yet there are still some bugs as well as features that I miss in my professional workflow. Here are some of them:
I miss integrated access to other spot color libraries such as HKS (not only Pantone) as HKS is a European standard Starting every print document with the cmyk color palette, every web document with the RGB palette etc. And, of course, every saved document with its document color palette. I think the color register is overall missing some logical structure as it is not clear why there are document, system and program palettes. I made my own HKS palette, but only when I import it as a document palette I can use it throughout the software, not only in the current document. That’s confusing. I miss that the pipette can copy styles. I miss the option to rotate the page view of a single page. When I make a layout in portrait mode but have a page that is in landscape mode by design, I really don’t want to turn my head or my display. I miss hotkeys to control how images are display within their containers (min-fit, max-fit etc.). There’s software like Capture One where I can apply a hotkey to literally every function. I am not sure why this shouldn’t be possible in Publisher, too. Keep up the good work. I really appreciate how you treat us folks in this time of crisis.
Cheers,
Johannes

I understand that FRW is not a DAM, it is an intake tool, a reasonable DAM does not exist for the MacOS environment.
I am curious why you would submit a batch of raw files to Affinity Photo?  Capture One Pro or Lightroom (or one of the lesser competitors) would be the typical environment to develop raw files and then use Affinity Photo like you would Photoshop.  Neither AP nor PS is suited to developing a great deal of raw images.
An example, I did a wildlife shoot this afternoon (with the proper social distancing, there was no one within miles).  I shot about 500 images, culled about half with FRW in about 15 minutes and then imported the rest into C1P to further cull the images.  Then I develop the remaining images in C1P, a handful will require additional work in AP.  There is no way I would even consider using AP as a primary develop tool.  That is not what it is designed to do...

Real duotones are not available but of course vector objects can use Pantone. Not sure how pixel objects behave though.

No user experience designers are involved in Affinity apps (my guess) - that is why.

But that is how it was done before InDesign added Span feature.

My first question would be, are you changing the leading of a paragraph, or doing some kind of override adjustments to a single line within a paragraph? That's not completely clear to me from the discussion so far.
If you're changing the leading of the paragraph, you have the Leading specification in the Context Toolbar, and you also have keyboard shortcuts available, which you can see in the Text > Paragraph Leading > ... dialog. But if you're overriding the leading of an individual line within a paragraph, you'll need the Character Panel.
Note that you don't necessarily "have to open another panel every time". You could leave the Character panel open..
Edit: Oh, and welcome to the Serif Affinity forums, Justin.

UI design can and should account for Micro interactions. These are typically short animations. Thats one reason. The other is for prototyping a layout. Being able to show what your intent is when someone clicks a button.
 
-Jim

Well said benwiggy.
The sooner Serif sort the pdf passthrough the sooner we can start to use Affinity Publisher, as at the moment it is just easier (although we would like to change) to use indesign.

That transparency problem has been discussed before in these forums. Personally I think it is an error in programmer thinking – if selection consists of whole pixels there should be no reason for transparent edges. If we want transparency, there is feather feature for it.

I request that PDF export More dialog box would be supplemented with optional Unsharp mask filtering part:

That would allow sharpening document images during export as batch operation. Operation flow would be then resample > sharpen > convert to CMYK, which is optimal.
Let me explain how I do this now with InDesign.
Typically I have publication with 48 pages and 55 images, which should go to press within 2 hours. And all the images are original, not photoshopped at all! How to handle this situation?
Easily. I select in InDesign menu command Zevrix>LinkOptimizer: 

And click Analyze Document, check if all files are OK, and click Process. LinkOptimizer opens all images to Photoshop, resamples them to 300 dpi, applies USM, converts to CMYK, and saves both images and ID document as copies to project folder. This happens while I drink a cup of coffee,  in about 4 minutes. After that I select Export in InDesign, upload the resulting PDF to press service website and go home early (instead of spending the night processing images by myself).
Me happy. Be like me and go home early.
Now, factually Publisher can do the very same processing in PDF export, except the sharpening part (well, InDy can too, without expensive ID add-on, except that sharpening part). Resample, sharpen, convert colours. If this part is added, you too can go home early!
I know there are people who insist that automatic processing is not going to give good enough quality. I say if source material is good enough this is qualitywise so good that it is fine 90 % of cases (I certainly fixx obvious image problems like white balance), (also if you do just fine art coffee table books this is obviously not good enough for you).
And I know there are people who do not do anything to images (like who cares, customers do not see any difference). For those this would increase print quality a lot.
I hope this can be added to PDF export without too many problems – I would guess PDF libraries are so modular that this can be fitted in easily enough.

I requested something similar for Publisher PDF output as there is also resample routine in PDF options:
Same sharpening routine could be added to any export options in any Affinity app.

Position and size is whole pixel? 

I've toyed with this concept in my head before.  The base Affinity application could be an Adobe Bridge type application – a gateway application – which is given away for free (and the cost absorbed by the other applications).  This would also allow anyone to view proprietary Affinity files even if they don't have Designer/Photo/Publisher.  Then, personas could be purchased and added to the base Affinity application either individually, or the whole suite could be purchased in one go.
I can't remember any other software companies doing this before though, so I'm guessing there must be reasons why separate dedicated applications are preferred.
 

The ability to easily edit masks without workarounds, please.

Hi,
I'm pleased to report that we have implemented the Divide blend mode for Photo 1.9, which will enter beta in a few weeks time.
Thanks,
Andy.