Herbert123

Time does not stand still - even 3d software like Blender now offers (vector based) freehand drawing tools, and the one thing that stands out are the excellent sculpting tools to affect existing lines with custom fall-offs and free transformation pivot points. A bit like the traditional bitmap warp tools on steroids.
 
Check these videos out:
 

 

 
I think it is time that vector illustration software developers start to rethink their traditional tool set at this point in time. All 3d software offers sculpting tools nowadays, and this makes the creative process MUCH easier, fluid, and intuitive. 2d vector illustration encounters similar challenges compared to 3d modeling - sculpting took 3d asset creation to the next level, and is now adapted industry-wide as a fundamental workflow.
 
How about AD offering similar sculpting tools to the 2d illustrator, and taking 2d vector creative illustration tools into the 21st century? :)

Yes, agreed. Krita is quite usable on Windows, but for Mac use it is not there yet, unfortunately. I would never use Photoline for digital painting, btw - the brush options are far too limited.
 
I love drawing in ClipStudio (Manga Studio)!

It is hard to believe such an essential feature is not part of Affinity Designer.
 
Photoline has a simplify curve option (and it does not even focus on being a vector app). InkScape can do this. ClipStudio offers a really nice simplify vector line brush tool to simplify curves. And of course many other vector illustration packages such as Illustrator, CorelDraw, Xara... Animation software that works with vectors all offer it: Anime Studio, Toonboom, Flash...
 
Heck, even Freehand has an option to do this. And Freehand is positively ancient!
 
In short, I am afraid it is somewhat odd and slightly bewildering for a modern dedicated vector package NOT to offer it from the get-go.

Here are examples of possible roughen effects that work on vector shapes. In the two applications that I used to create these, the effects remain live and can be stacked for combinations.
 
These should provide food for thought for the developers.
 

Filter Forge is a great plugin (I use it myself), but Chrono is correct: having access to a couple of procedural texture generators, even basic ones, is an incredibly worthwhile and useful addition for all sorts of work and these procedural textures often serve as a base for a multitude of effects and compositing work.
 
Here is an example of a built-in procedural texture editor for inspiration. Clouds and basic noise generators are just the start. These could also be tremendously useful for Designer. The point is that these would be infinitely adjustable and applicable as live effects as well.
 
 

 

Another option: Blender & Freestyle SVG output. If anyone is interested, I can put up a small video tutorial. And it works with any type of 3d object, of course :-) The only caveat is that the generated SVG files must be opened and saved in Inkscape before the file is compatible with Designer's SVG import (other applications have issues with these SVG files as well, btw).
 
The edges that must be converted to curves can be marked specifically. True 3d spheres at your fingertips! :D
 
I have attached a Designer file for anyone who wishes to inspect the curves..

   
 
spheres_freestyle.afdesign

Another option: Blender & Freestyle SVG output. If anyone is interested, I can put up a small video tutorial. And it works with any type of 3d object, of course :-) The only caveat is that the generated SVG files must be opened and saved in Inkscape before the file is compatible with Designer's SVG import (other applications have issues with these SVG files as well, btw).
 
The edges that must be converted to curves can be marked specifically. True 3d spheres at your fingertips! :D
 
I have attached a Designer file for anyone who wishes to inspect the curves..

   
 
spheres_freestyle.afdesign

The gradient fill GUI in Designer is, in my opinion, "acceptable".  A number of usability issues exist, and when I compare to other software, it is easy to see how it could be improved further:
While a gradient fill tool is available in Designer, it is rather awkward that the same tool forces the user to switch the context to stroke before the user is able to control a stroke gradient applied to the same object. And the tool icon state changes when the user switches to stroke context, which is confusing.

It is not possible to control both gradients (fill and stroke) simultaneously. This means back and forth switching in order to make changes to both, which is time-consuming to say the very least. The user is forced to move the mouse to the tool properties bar to switch context, then make a change to either the stroke gradient or the fill gradient, and again these steps are required to change the gradient for the other context.

The dropdown menu to change gradient context is slow to work with - perhaps buttons instead?

An alternative method: select an object, switch to the gradient tool, and both gradients can be simultaneously controlled with similar on-screen widgets: no context switching is required.


  Color stop colours can only be changed via the colour chooser panel and the gradient editor in the tool properties in Designer, again forcing the user to break the workflow by having to move the mouse cursor from the artwork to either the tool bar or the colour panel.

It is not possible to double-click a colour stop, or right-mouse click a colour stop to change to a different colour.

Allowing the user to either double-click or right-mouse click a colour stop to quickly change the colour would be much faster, and maintains control context more.


  To change gradient type properties in Designer, again the user must work through the tool properties only.

It would be useful to allow the user to access gradient properties such as gradient type, revert gradient, colour mode, and colour stop interpolation with a simple right-mouse click on the gradient itself, which would speed things up.

And it is a shame Designer does not support alternate interpolation modes between colour stops - it makes working with gradients simpler and more effective.


  When saving a gradient swatch, the actual transformation of the gradient is not saved. I can see why this is, but it is actually quite handy to be able to save the gradient transformation state in the colour swatch. Ideally both options would be available to the user, depending on the context.
  Finally, the small stuff: it is not possible for the user to click & drag a new colour stop in one action. Colour stops cannot be simply dragged off the gradient widget to remove stops. As far as I can tell,  it is not possible to move the entire gradient with linear gradients. It would be nice to have the option to move the mid-point of a circular/elliptical gradient separately from the other control points. Anyway, food for thought. My main gripe with Designer's gradient tool is that it feels a tad clunky and slow to work with when I want to change both the stroke and fill gradients of the same object.

Hi Matt,
 
I decided that a neutral tone would be more useful in any case - I edited the gradient post, and it reads more like a feature request now, or GUI/UX critique. I feel that is a more effective approach.
 
And I will mention other products when it makes sense to do so.
 
Thanks & cheers,
 
H

As far as I am able to ascertain, Designer lacks an option to fit a dashed stroke to the corners, which automatically adjusts when the object is resized. It would be an extremely useful feature to have.
 
Like this:
 

The reason why I mention Photoline a lot is because I use it every day in my freelance work (after switching from Photoshop), and I am actively looking for a good Illustrator alternative and InDesign alternative. I probably stand out because not many users work with Photoline (as a matter of fact, I believe I stand alone as an outspoken Photoline user on these forums) - had I mentioned Illustrator and Photoshop in those posts instead for the sake of comparison (which far more users on these forums tend to do), you probably would not have noticed it. Photoline is my base line, so to speak. For most others it will be Illustrator. And I often do mention a variety of other software products as well besides Photoline.
 
Although Photoline does vector, it is focused on bitmap editing (more of a Photoshop competitor) - even so, I find that it offers a number of features in terms of vector editing (similar to Illustrator) that seem rather basic to me, and are still missing in Designer. And when I compare Designer with Photoline, I do this in the hope that the dev team will take note of this, and improve Designer.
 
Because I WANT a complete & strong Illustrator competitor. If I was not clear about this, let me state it this way: I have used just about every single vector illustration package on the market since Illustrator 3 and the first version of Freehand - commercial, open source, and freeware. Currently I use InkScape in combination with Photoline. InkScape is quite okay, but not within the realms of Illustrator. I have used Xara and CorelDraw as well, but only with Designer do I get a good "vibe". I want Affinity Designer to become the vector app to compete with Illustrator, and it already feels better than Illustrator at this point. Still needs work, but it is getting there - and the work the devs put into improving Designer is very much appreciated indeed.
 
I am unsure about the instances of dishonest comparisons/bug reporting. I do make mistakes, and I am still learning Affinity Designer myself. When I do compare to Photoline (or other applications), I do so because I feel the implementation of a certain tool works better than the one in Designer in its current form. As for this thread and my responses: none of those were meant in any spiteful manner - I converted a font after reading this thread, and I merely wondered about the reasons, and, as it turned out, it is a bug in the Windows version (and, to be fair, I did compare this in four software products, not only Photoline).
 
When I posted the comparison with Photoline's gradient widgets the other day, I did so not from the perspective of "selling" Photoline, but merely to demonstrate that Designer's implementation is somewhat clunky compared. Better than most, but it can still be improved quite a bit in my opinion.
 
I compare singular features which could/should be improved in Designer, and be made more convenient and effective to use. Designer has many vector drawing options that are missing in Photoline. And I've already begun to use those in Designer alongside Photoline.
 
Now, if you ask me whether I would switch to Affinity Photo anytime soon? No chance at this point. Personally I think Photoline is still on another level in terms of pure image editing. Perhaps in the future, though - I am software agnostic. Whatever works best, and as long as subscriptions are kept out of the equation (which is the reason I stopped using Adobe software three years ago after being a loyal user since Photoshop 3).
 
And no, I do not work for Photoline. If you take the long history of Photoline into account (since 1995), you will discover that almost no marketing whatsoever is done. Even now barely a designer is even aware it exists. So in this regard Serif has little to fear :-) You have done the Affinity marketing right.
 
To push this point further: I teach at various colleges and a technical university, and I mentioned Affinity Designer to all my students when the Windows beta was released. I even gave a quick demonstration and told them AD is already a good alternative for those seeking a way out of the Adobe Digital Serfdom. In my Mac classes, I always mention AD and AP as alternatives (I tried this with Photoline too, but students like Affinity better - more fashionable, I suppose. The marketing helps :-P )
 
So, if anything Serif ought to have gotten business from at least some of my students by now.
 
Anyway, I will stop mentioning any specific product as a point of comparison from this point onward. Only screenshots with alternative suggestions and workflows if I feel it could be useful - but no more product names.
This is my last post mentioning Photoline in these forums. Pinky Promise!
 
Finally, if I ever came across as condescending or putting down the efforts of Affinity devs, then I apologize humbly - that certainly is not, nor has ever been, my intention. I am a code hugger myself, and I understand the effort, sweat and tears that accompany coding.
 
Pwah, long post.

The reason why I mention Photoline a lot is because I use it every day in my freelance work (after switching from Photoshop), and I am actively looking for a good Illustrator alternative and InDesign alternative. I probably stand out because not many users work with Photoline (as a matter of fact, I believe I stand alone as an outspoken Photoline user on these forums) - had I mentioned Illustrator and Photoshop in those posts instead for the sake of comparison (which far more users on these forums tend to do), you probably would not have noticed it. Photoline is my base line, so to speak. For most others it will be Illustrator. And I often do mention a variety of other software products as well besides Photoline.
 
Although Photoline does vector, it is focused on bitmap editing (more of a Photoshop competitor) - even so, I find that it offers a number of features in terms of vector editing (similar to Illustrator) that seem rather basic to me, and are still missing in Designer. And when I compare Designer with Photoline, I do this in the hope that the dev team will take note of this, and improve Designer.
 
Because I WANT a complete & strong Illustrator competitor. If I was not clear about this, let me state it this way: I have used just about every single vector illustration package on the market since Illustrator 3 and the first version of Freehand - commercial, open source, and freeware. Currently I use InkScape in combination with Photoline. InkScape is quite okay, but not within the realms of Illustrator. I have used Xara and CorelDraw as well, but only with Designer do I get a good "vibe". I want Affinity Designer to become the vector app to compete with Illustrator, and it already feels better than Illustrator at this point. Still needs work, but it is getting there - and the work the devs put into improving Designer is very much appreciated indeed.
 
I am unsure about the instances of dishonest comparisons/bug reporting. I do make mistakes, and I am still learning Affinity Designer myself. When I do compare to Photoline (or other applications), I do so because I feel the implementation of a certain tool works better than the one in Designer in its current form. As for this thread and my responses: none of those were meant in any spiteful manner - I converted a font after reading this thread, and I merely wondered about the reasons, and, as it turned out, it is a bug in the Windows version (and, to be fair, I did compare this in four software products, not only Photoline).
 
When I posted the comparison with Photoline's gradient widgets the other day, I did so not from the perspective of "selling" Photoline, but merely to demonstrate that Designer's implementation is somewhat clunky compared. Better than most, but it can still be improved quite a bit in my opinion.
 
I compare singular features which could/should be improved in Designer, and be made more convenient and effective to use. Designer has many vector drawing options that are missing in Photoline. And I've already begun to use those in Designer alongside Photoline.
 
Now, if you ask me whether I would switch to Affinity Photo anytime soon? No chance at this point. Personally I think Photoline is still on another level in terms of pure image editing. Perhaps in the future, though - I am software agnostic. Whatever works best, and as long as subscriptions are kept out of the equation (which is the reason I stopped using Adobe software three years ago after being a loyal user since Photoshop 3).
 
And no, I do not work for Photoline. If you take the long history of Photoline into account (since 1995), you will discover that almost no marketing whatsoever is done. Even now barely a designer is even aware it exists. So in this regard Serif has little to fear :-) You have done the Affinity marketing right.
 
To push this point further: I teach at various colleges and a technical university, and I mentioned Affinity Designer to all my students when the Windows beta was released. I even gave a quick demonstration and told them AD is already a good alternative for those seeking a way out of the Adobe Digital Serfdom. In my Mac classes, I always mention AD and AP as alternatives (I tried this with Photoline too, but students like Affinity better - more fashionable, I suppose. The marketing helps :-P )
 
So, if anything Serif ought to have gotten business from at least some of my students by now.
 
Anyway, I will stop mentioning any specific product as a point of comparison from this point onward. Only screenshots with alternative suggestions and workflows if I feel it could be useful - but no more product names.
This is my last post mentioning Photoline in these forums. Pinky Promise!
 
Finally, if I ever came across as condescending or putting down the efforts of Affinity devs, then I apologize humbly - that certainly is not, nor has ever been, my intention. I am a code hugger myself, and I understand the effort, sweat and tears that accompany coding.
 
Pwah, long post.

Photoshop plugins come in one of two possible flavours. The first one is deemed "the classic Photoshop plugin". These typically have the extension *.8bf, and have a pretty high chance to work in non-Adobe software that supports Photoshop plugins. Examples are plugins such as Google NIK, FilterForge, and Topaz.
 
The second flavour of Photoshop plugin completely relies on, and is entirely integrated in, Photoshop's functional framework. These are 100% incompatible with any other software, unless the entire framework of Photoshop would be emulated somehow. Which is a ridiculous thought, of course.
 
You might have guessed by now: Quixel's suite of tools falls into the second category. It is indeed a devastating thought - the short of it is that Quixel is quite impossible to run outside the Photoshop environment.
 
Quite, quite impossible, and it will never happen. Besides, to run Quixel, some kind of 3d OpenGL viewport is required. Which Affinity photo and Designer both lack. Sorry to be the bearer of such ignominiously rotten news.
 
 
Should you still wish to leave Photoshop for 3d texturing work, your options are plentiful: 3dCoat, Substance Designer/Painter, Mari, and so forth. I predominantly do my texture painting work in 3dCoat.

I use Inkscape's built-in bitmap trace. Works really well for black and white line art conversions. Save as SVG, and import into Affinity.

It is hard to believe such an essential feature is not part of Affinity Designer.
 
Photoline has a simplify curve option (and it does not even focus on being a vector app). InkScape can do this. ClipStudio offers a really nice simplify vector line brush tool to simplify curves. And of course many other vector illustration packages such as Illustrator, CorelDraw, Xara... Animation software that works with vectors all offer it: Anime Studio, Toonboom, Flash...
 
Heck, even Freehand has an option to do this. And Freehand is positively ancient!
 
In short, I am afraid it is somewhat odd and slightly bewildering for a modern dedicated vector package NOT to offer it from the get-go.

I use Inkscape's built-in bitmap trace. Works really well for black and white line art conversions. Save as SVG, and import into Affinity.

I feel your pain: there is nothing more frustrating than having a tool you've relied on for years discontinued or killed - no matter the circumstances.
 
I am unsure whether it is a good idea to integrate web tools in a DTP application. InDesign attempts this, and the result is abysmal - and it takes a completely different mindset and a LOT of work to keep it updated with current web practices, which are a rapidly moving target.
 
Visual web page building tools always interest me (being a web developer) since I do believe it is possible to create a visual tool that actually writes reasonable, or even good, html and css code. The trouble with both Freeway and Muse, in my opinion, is that they both generate quite terrible html and css code.
 
Currently, I found one visual tool that actually writes quite nice code, and allows the user to base their pages on standard frameworks such as Bootstrap, Foundation, Angular JS, and even the newer Google Materialize. And Wordpress templating is also supported (in the pro WP version). That application is Pinegrow http://pinegrow.com/
 
It is quite different from Freeway, but it allows for a visual workflow, as well as easy code access. With Atom (free editor) you get real-time bi-directional page and code updating (no saving required!).
 
Most importantly, it is constantly updated (Foundation 6 was supported only a couple of weeks after it was introduced), and the code quality is great. It also supports master pages, components, and other project management tools.
 
The drawback is that you will perhaps need a bit more technical insight in html and css. But I really believe anyone can (should) learn the basics in that regard nowadays.
 
I think Pinegrow gives the designer the best of both worlds.

Either makes hardly any difference, or that function does not work properly on my system. Still too dark for my taste.

I found this to be equally frustrating in Photoshop and Illustrator - Photoshop's senior developer considers this to be a non-issue, ridiculously enough!
 
Please observe these two identical gradients in Photoline:

A typical three stop radial gradient: white, #3a3e61, white.
 
The left version (linear) is what we get in Photoshop, Illustrator, Affinity Designer, and other applications. The right one is the same gradient, but that gradient is set to a cubic interpolation in Photoline. Notice the soft transition between the center colour stop and the outer two stops.
 
Please consider an option in your gradient editor to assign a cubic interpolation - it makes a huge difference when creating smooth blends with gradients.
 
Also, I found gradient editing to be a bit painful in Affinity Designer - not as painful as Illustrator or (Gods forbid) Photoshop, but Photoline's gradient editor options are user friendlier and more efficient:
 
1) colours can be picked by right-mouse clicking a stop, or double-clicking a stop;
2) the eliptical and circular gradients are combined in one gradient tool widget in the view;
3) all properties of the gradient can be directly accessed by right-mouse clicking the widget;
4) gradients can be repeated and mirror repeated;
5) starting point and end points can be consistently moved individually, and holding down ALT allows for moving the entire gradient (this works similarly in AD, but is a bit inconsistent depending on the chosen gradient type - for example it is not possible to move the center point of a radial/elliptical gradient in AD separately from the outer stop - both move).
 
The conical gradient is nice to have, though, in AD. And nice to see that AD allow for snapping as well (Photoline's gradients also snap to geometry, and so on) - although in Photoline an arbitrary point of the gradient can be snapped as well.
 
At the very least consider implementing cubic interpolation for gradients in AD. Designers will thank you for this :-)

I found this to be equally frustrating in Photoshop and Illustrator - Photoshop's senior developer considers this to be a non-issue, ridiculously enough!
 
Please observe these two identical gradients in Photoline:

A typical three stop radial gradient: white, #3a3e61, white.
 
The left version (linear) is what we get in Photoshop, Illustrator, Affinity Designer, and other applications. The right one is the same gradient, but that gradient is set to a cubic interpolation in Photoline. Notice the soft transition between the center colour stop and the outer two stops.
 
Please consider an option in your gradient editor to assign a cubic interpolation - it makes a huge difference when creating smooth blends with gradients.
 
Also, I found gradient editing to be a bit painful in Affinity Designer - not as painful as Illustrator or (Gods forbid) Photoshop, but Photoline's gradient editor options are user friendlier and more efficient:
 
1) colours can be picked by right-mouse clicking a stop, or double-clicking a stop;
2) the eliptical and circular gradients are combined in one gradient tool widget in the view;
3) all properties of the gradient can be directly accessed by right-mouse clicking the widget;
4) gradients can be repeated and mirror repeated;
5) starting point and end points can be consistently moved individually, and holding down ALT allows for moving the entire gradient (this works similarly in AD, but is a bit inconsistent depending on the chosen gradient type - for example it is not possible to move the center point of a radial/elliptical gradient in AD separately from the outer stop - both move).
 
The conical gradient is nice to have, though, in AD. And nice to see that AD allow for snapping as well (Photoline's gradients also snap to geometry, and so on) - although in Photoline an arbitrary point of the gradient can be snapped as well.
 
At the very least consider implementing cubic interpolation for gradients in AD. Designers will thank you for this :-)

The newer Photoshop specific plugins rely completely on Photoshop's architecture, and those will NEVER EVER work in other applications.
 
Regular Photoshop compatible 8bf plugins will generally work in other image editors which support these older Photoshop plugins. For example, the NIK collection works without a hitch in Photoline, PaintShop Pro, and indeed Affinity.
 
I do agree with you that Affinity ought to provide a way to work with external executables. Photoline has a round-trip option to send a layer or the entire file to any third-party application, with several interchange formats. Send a layer to Krita, work on it, save the edits, and when switching back to Photoline all the changes are automatically applied. Super handy.

OpenTOonz! In the same league as ToonBoom, and recently got open-sourced. It supports vector animation (favours it, actually), and even sports excellent bitmap to vector conversion.
 
It's free, and I love it for 2d animation. Mind, OT's workflow may require some acclimatization. Worth it, though. OpenTOonz is a serious production-level animation package - used by Studio Ghibli and the makers of Futurama. Also works well with Anime Studio, Krita, and ClipStudio.
OT supports SVG import - although it depends on the complexity of the artwork how well this will work. I find importing high-res easter versions, and converting those to vectors in OT may work better in those cases.
 
https://opentoonz.github.io/e/index.html
Forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!categories/opentoonz_en
Tips worksheet: https://workflowy.com/s/JtI13Zub8a#
Manual: http://www.toonz.com/cgi-shl/download/71H/Toonz%20Harlequin%2071%20User%20Guide.pdf
Many video tutorials have become available:
vimeo.com/brundlethwaite/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-t3I3gSAsZWsCvsxUkBZRA

OpenTOonz! In the same league as ToonBoom, and recently got open-sourced. It supports vector animation (favours it, actually), and even sports excellent bitmap to vector conversion.
 
It's free, and I love it for 2d animation. Mind, OT's workflow may require some acclimatization. Worth it, though. OpenTOonz is a serious production-level animation package - used by Studio Ghibli and the makers of Futurama. Also works well with Anime Studio, Krita, and ClipStudio.
OT supports SVG import - although it depends on the complexity of the artwork how well this will work. I find importing high-res easter versions, and converting those to vectors in OT may work better in those cases.
 
https://opentoonz.github.io/e/index.html
Forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!categories/opentoonz_en
Tips worksheet: https://workflowy.com/s/JtI13Zub8a#
Manual: http://www.toonz.com/cgi-shl/download/71H/Toonz%20Harlequin%2071%20User%20Guide.pdf
Many video tutorials have become available:
vimeo.com/brundlethwaite/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-t3I3gSAsZWsCvsxUkBZRA

It really is too bad that developing in Photo is destructive. Photoshop, Photoline, and others offer non-destructive RAW processing.
 
An alternative workflow would be to use an external RAW developer (Lightroom, RawTherapee, etc.) which create sidecar files, and then place the result as a linked asset in Photoshop or Photoline. Then when the original file is edited, PH and PL can update the content of that external linked layer. But Affinity Photo does not support linked file layers either.
 
Which means no solution, other than re-doing the work again if changes are required in the RAW processing.

Oops, I did initially add C4d to the list, but closed the window during typing, and forgot to add it the second time.
 
There are others as well. I left out the hobbyist products (Daz Studio, Poser, etc.)