Fixx

Hitting the keyboard shortcut for a tool sometimes brings up another (previous tool used). For example, Perhaps I use clone and then brush tool. I stop or get distracted and I forget which tool, so I hit B shortcut again for Brush tool and it goes back to clone tool. They look very similar, circle + crosshairs, so I start painting and I get clone tool. I then have to undo etc. This is not a deal breaker because AP is a great program for the price. I am production and I have to move very fast. This happens at least 3-4 times a day. It is annoying. When I hit a shortcut key, that is the tool I want. I don't want to scan the toolbar to confirm my tool selection etc. At least give us an option in preferences to turn off this feature. Thanks

Thank you Fixx. I had a look at it, but I did not really like it. Maybe for very simple pics but it looks much nicer when handmade.

.
 

If you want to play with triangle meshes this is nice tool: http://dmesh.thedofl.com/

If you want to play with triangle meshes this is nice tool: http://dmesh.thedofl.com/

It is going to be a long long longlonglong summer 

.
 

For this type of file, I would strongly recommend exporting to PNG rather than to JPEG. You will get no compression artifacts around letters and contours and an overall smaller file size (13kb) at better quality.

 

At best removing mipmaps would save 25% of the overall image data size, but it's not as straight forward as that as the document file contains other data and so I'd estimate a best case saving of 20%.
Save-As already removes redundancy from the af file, so gives you a best size (but including mipmaps).  I'm not sure what the mood would be like for having a save mode that removes mipmaps.  It wouldn't just be about save - the loading would have to be modified also.

There are a lot of quite good pixel editors and vector apps, but only 2 or 3 good (and expensive) layout apps.

.

Rasterising should be avoided. Rasterizing can reduce image quality, as it (as I have heard) uses nearest neighbour resampling, and it just does not retain original pixel data for later manipulations. Rasterising can be harmful.
That said, I think Serif should allow copying selection from image layer, i.e. rasterize a copy behind the scene, copy needed part and leave the original layer untouched. Cutting on the other hand always modifies original layer, so I guess auto rasterization would be ok. People who need original quality can always use a mask instead.

If you have transformed a layer or done some other layer operations to it, it is not the same as original. As far as I am aware, rasterization fits image layer pixels to document resolution. (Of course it is possible that rasterization keeps original pixels and does not resample, but no one has not said so...)
If you just simply open an image for manipulation in AP, it is a pixel layer and none of this rasterization stuff is necessary.
Yes, I have heard. There has not been any definite answer what actually happen in rasterization resample, but nearest neighbour was mentioned, Affinity personnel has not said anything about it.

?

So, I've done some initial testing with us moving over to ZStandard.  First impressions are good - a modest improvement in compression ratio, and a considerable improvement in compression/decompression speed.  So - after some more testing looks like we might be going for it.
 
I'm also testing a few ideas to help us further improve on compression ratio.  Initial tests have gained between 2% and 8% for my sample 16-bit documents.  8-bit documents remain unchanged - think I've already squeezed all I can there with our immediate compression methods.  I'm next going to explore possibilities for some proprietary methods to see if we can gain any more.

We are not interested in units, but changing the values.
Again, we are not interested in units, but changing the values.
That is not true. Many users like the way AP UI looks, but many experienced users find AP way of doing things convoluted. Photoshop UI has been honed during it +25 years existence to being very effective way of manipulating graphics. In Photoshop many basic operations are simple, logical and straightforward. 

?

Ah, just give some kind of arrowheads. My needs are humble.

?

Whenever I am working on a project and using AP, Photoshop is always fired up and running in the background, just waiting to be used for those things AP isn't ready for just yet.
Photoshop is at times like AP's big brother just waiting to step in and help him out when he gets out of his depth
 

Oh, sorry. I go back using Adobe.

The Affinity apps provide 3 aspect ratio choices:

Without the modifier key "Automatic" constrains items that have a 'natural' aspect ratio (like image or pixel layers or an embedded document) but does not constrain the aspect ratio of items like vector shapes. Using the modifier with this option reverses that.

You can select one object, hold the ctrl key down (I suppose cmd on the Mac), and hover your mouse over the other object you desire to know the distance to...

 

 
I've done a lot of technical drawings including 3D mechanicals. I cannot remember the last time I used the ruler origin point to do so. It would be nice for those who desire it in AD, and I suspect it'll eventually make it into the software.
The people at Serif aren't putting it off for any other reason than there are simply higher priorities. You want movable ruler origins and I want something before those, and others want their things first, and...and...and Serif is in the position to be damned if they do and damned if they don't by one set of users or another.

... especially as it is from my humble point of view quite a pro feature, when it comes to print processes.

Term used here is "crop to size" and it is indeed still missing.