Bryan Rieger

Meanwhile, developers and Apple aren't even able to keep programs working when Apple comes out with a new macOS every year.
I'd much rather everyone focus on that rather than developing features that attempt to make boring people interesting.

If Serif finally manages to finish scripting and plugins, this functionality can be supplemented with a paid plugin. If someone needs it, they will buy the plugin, and possibly pay fees for operation. If he doesn't need it, he won't pay anything. This can then be applied to other functions/services, such as paid vectorization using AI, which the built-in function can never compete with, etc.

Hi @Hangman,
I've logged this 'Juddering' UI issue with the developers and also made reference to that it can be observed when re-sizing the app window. 👍

Along with the countless other issues that users have been complaining about for years. 🤷‍♂️
Don't hold your breath.

Create Publisher document with a Master page
Add some text to the Master page (both sides, if applicable)
In Layers panel copy Master page
Create new document with no Master page
Paste Master page (previously copied)
Results:
Expand that Master page to see the text layer(s)
Each will have an orange stripe
Enter Designer persona
Master page is now showing in Symbols Panel

The Affinity programs are clearly made by someone who has developed on Windows for decades, and now seems to try to counter any convention of the Apple UI. The result is not just a matter of different attitude and adaptation, but one of compromised efficiency.
 

They are included in the Mac versions but for some unknown reason they only display the thumbnails embedded in the files, so they do not offer larger previews.

My color profiles appear to be sRGB IEC61966-2.1.

Logged as AF-4026
(Forum search keywords: sculpt auto-close with the search box set to Everywhere)

@thomahawk enough with the click-bait! The only mention of IPO in that article is "There have also been talks of a Canva IPO for years, but its CEO has remained quiet on the matter." This isn't news, as this is pretty much the way any CEO of an investor backed company would behave. Investors will always be looking for an IPO (or a lucrative acquisition) for a paid exit, but that doesn't mean one is imminent.

@thomahawk enough with the click-bait! The only mention of IPO in that article is "There have also been talks of a Canva IPO for years, but its CEO has remained quiet on the matter." This isn't news, as this is pretty much the way any CEO of an investor backed company would behave. Investors will always be looking for an IPO (or a lucrative acquisition) for a paid exit, but that doesn't mean one is imminent.

1) It depends on what features of InDesign you're using. For "arranging things on a page" I'd say that Affinity Publisher far surpasses InDesign in the way you work with objects and text on page (once you get used to it). Where you might run into issues is with colour spaces and ICC profiles (RGB, CMYK, SWOP, etc) as Publisher works a little differently than InDesign in this manner. You can get great results with Publisher, but it doesn't 'automagically' manage colour spaces and profiles in the same way that InDesign does. In this regards one issue you might run into is 100K black text exporting as rich black which often catches folks coming from other software.
2) I would ask the publisher which PDF version and settings they prefer and then try outputting a sample from Affinity Publisher to see if it's acceptable. Unless they have very specific requirements (ie: an older or less common version of PDF/X) you should be able to easily output a PDF to meet their needs from the Affinity apps.

Thanks, Bryan!   I really appreciate it.  
Just knowing that, I feel confident starting to watch videos and learning the software.   Just that it's mostly going to do what I need, I'll go with the one-time purchase model and learn what I don't know from there.
Getting started with a software, especially to the point where you can really use it at it's full potential is where the real investment comes from- the time you spend on it.  I didn't want to go learn CS6 just because I own it if there's something current out there that isn't a subscription model. 
This is what I was looking for, downloading the apps now and will start learning it tonight.   

Thanks again for the reply!

1) It depends on what features of InDesign you're using. For "arranging things on a page" I'd say that Affinity Publisher far surpasses InDesign in the way you work with objects and text on page (once you get used to it). Where you might run into issues is with colour spaces and ICC profiles (RGB, CMYK, SWOP, etc) as Publisher works a little differently than InDesign in this manner. You can get great results with Publisher, but it doesn't 'automagically' manage colour spaces and profiles in the same way that InDesign does. In this regards one issue you might run into is 100K black text exporting as rich black which often catches folks coming from other software.
2) I would ask the publisher which PDF version and settings they prefer and then try outputting a sample from Affinity Publisher to see if it's acceptable. Unless they have very specific requirements (ie: an older or less common version of PDF/X) you should be able to easily output a PDF to meet their needs from the Affinity apps.

1) It depends on what features of InDesign you're using. For "arranging things on a page" I'd say that Affinity Publisher far surpasses InDesign in the way you work with objects and text on page (once you get used to it). Where you might run into issues is with colour spaces and ICC profiles (RGB, CMYK, SWOP, etc) as Publisher works a little differently than InDesign in this manner. You can get great results with Publisher, but it doesn't 'automagically' manage colour spaces and profiles in the same way that InDesign does. In this regards one issue you might run into is 100K black text exporting as rich black which often catches folks coming from other software.
2) I would ask the publisher which PDF version and settings they prefer and then try outputting a sample from Affinity Publisher to see if it's acceptable. Unless they have very specific requirements (ie: an older or less common version of PDF/X) you should be able to easily output a PDF to meet their needs from the Affinity apps.

@thomahawk enough with the click-bait! The only mention of IPO in that article is "There have also been talks of a Canva IPO for years, but its CEO has remained quiet on the matter." This isn't news, as this is pretty much the way any CEO of an investor backed company would behave. Investors will always be looking for an IPO (or a lucrative acquisition) for a paid exit, but that doesn't mean one is imminent.

I don't recall @Patrick Connor saying anything about the post-acquisition resourcing and hiring practices of Serif/Affinity beyond "That's not for me to say, sorry, but I've seen many positive changes since the acquisition." Software takes time, good software even more so. 2.5 wasn't a stellar release, no one will argue that, but I wouldn't consider Serif/Affinity taking their time on 2.6 to be a bad thing. In fact, I'd say it's the opposite, as I'd much rather have Serif/Affinity release fewer, meaningful and bug-free (or at least fewer bugs) updates than constantly shovelling out poor release after poor release.
I think there's a lot riding on 2.6 in terms of user and market expectations, and the worst thing that could happen would be for 2.6 to be another 2.5.
It just went out this week, give it time.

It requires you to enable 'Transform Objects Separately' in the top control bar (see below).
If '=' is only ever available/permitted when 'Transform Objects Separately' is enabled, then maybe it would make sense to enable it automatically if somebody types '=' into a field for that transformation only. Adding a little 'toast' animation or some sort of indication that 'Transform Objects Separately' has been applied would be helpful not only to provide feedback, but to aid in further understanding of how the feature is intended to work.

Hi @Catshill,
It is still on the roadmap to be fixed, not as an independent issue, but as part of a broader revision of the Export dialog.

I don't recall @Patrick Connor saying anything about the post-acquisition resourcing and hiring practices of Serif/Affinity beyond "That's not for me to say, sorry, but I've seen many positive changes since the acquisition." Software takes time, good software even more so. 2.5 wasn't a stellar release, no one will argue that, but I wouldn't consider Serif/Affinity taking their time on 2.6 to be a bad thing. In fact, I'd say it's the opposite, as I'd much rather have Serif/Affinity release fewer, meaningful and bug-free (or at least fewer bugs) updates than constantly shovelling out poor release after poor release.
I think there's a lot riding on 2.6 in terms of user and market expectations, and the worst thing that could happen would be for 2.6 to be another 2.5.
It just went out this week, give it time.

I’ve been using Affinity Designer for a while now in my work as a graphic designer. I haven’t been in the industry for long—quite the opposite, I’ve only just started applying myself commercially—but even so, I have a solid foundation in graphic design. I have some brief experience with Photoshop, but that’s about it. What I mean by this is that I’m the ideal user for Affinity because I don’t carry the baggage of Photoshop/Illustrator that many others do, leading them to make comparisons, especially when they encounter something different in Affinity. My professional design journey is beginning now, using Serif’s tools.
Because of this, intuitive usability is one of the most important things for me. During the time I used Photoshop, I didn’t have many issues with this. When I had something to do, my intuition guided me, and I did it—it worked. But in Affinity Designer, I’ve encountered so many non-intuitive things that I can’t even remember them all.
As a result, I’ve spent a lot of time watching tutorials online and reading forums. This is normal, I know, but the problem is that this applies to very simple tasks. I’ve had to watch tutorials to accomplish things that should be straightforward.
For example, Affinity Designer exports artboards from bottom to top in PDF format. This means that in the layers panel, the first layer will be the last one displayed, and the last layer will be the first. This simply doesn’t make sense from a user’s perspective.
This leads to another problem: the developers’ reluctance to take usability feedback into account. There have been so many times when I was reading the forum, where a user raised a usability issue, and the developers responded by justifying their design choices with programmer logic, not user logic. In the example mentioned above, a user brought up this issue eight years ago, and a programmer did exactly what I’m talking about. And to this day, there’s no way to export artboards in the usual order. It’s frustrating, to say the least.
This is a direct critique of some of the usability choices made by the developers and their reluctance to listen to users and design the software for users (not for themselves). I’ve seen many complaints along these lines, but I’ve never seen a post specifically about this, which is why I decided to raise the issue myself.
Despite all this, I like Affinity and intend to continue using it, but that’s because I’ve had the patience to work around these flaws and I haven’t intensively used Adobe’s tools before. For a user with more experience in other software, these problems are likely even more pronounced.

Keeping a dead thread alive. 😆
I think that the reason why its omission is most frustrating is that Affinity products are informally positioned as 1:1 Adobe alternatives. So, for many users, it hurts to see these apps succeed in that respect on SO many levels, yet falter on a few of the most critical. And if the goal to outright replace Adobe and leave their subscriptions, shenanigans behind... mission failed.
I've read these threads where Serif says that such a feature is not a priority, how timeline animation is not a critical feature, how investing in its development takes away from the goal of the app, and how what's being asked for is obscenely complicated. Let me briefly address those points.
First off, if the informal goal is to provide Affinity users a truly viable alternative to Photoshop, allowing us to indulge in our creative pursuits, then it SHOULD be a priority. After all, Photoshop may have originally been designed for photo editing, but countless creators have also been using it to build 100% new content for decades. Why should Affinity be any different?
In mimicking Photoshop's design, workflow, & aesthetic, Affinity Photo is mostly successful and it's that "mostly" that continues to pain us. Affinity users aren't just "photo geeks" looking to edit our pics. We're creators. If it's a priority for us then, ideally, it should be a greater priority for the developers too.
"Timeline animation is not a critical feature." Again, Affinity's demographic sharply overlaps with Adobe's here. How many Adobe artists are there out there that specialize in pixel art & animation? Just going by the overwhelming number of pieces on ArtStation... countless. Adobe users look to Photoshop to fill that need and, well, it does - by and large. Again, why should Affinity be any different?
There have been a lot of indie & studio pixel art games that have been made using and without having to leave Photoshop. Affinity Photo users can create the stills, but are unable to take them to the next level in situ. We instead have to leave this one experience & enter another. It's a time vampire & workflow disturbance, especially when those 3rd party apps lack Affinity Photo's other tools and overall polish.
If Serif hopes to capture more of those Adobe PS using indie & studio artists who specialize in pixel art, animation then this feature should be critical because, well, it is. Again Affinity Photo, much like Photoshop, has long surpassed its original goal of being an app simply for photo editing. It's now the home to many, many creators - some of whom are indie and others who are simply disenfranchised with the other guys.
How many prospective Affinity users do you think have looked at its feature list, noticed certain things missing, and have just walked the other way or, worse, stayed with Adobe because they had no viable alternative that fit their needs?
"But what you're asking for is some super specialized, complex bit of software. Affinity Photo is not that. That's not our goal."
... ... ...
Ugh. There's this misconception that we're asking Serif to turn Affinity Photo into Moho or Toon Boom. That's NOT the case. We're not even asking for the more specialized features of open source apps like Aseprite or Pencil 2D. Nope.
Hopes & dreamy wish lists aside, what we're asking for is a bare minimum level of functionality. At this point, Affinity Photo cannot even put together simple image sequences. It's a little embarrassing to see this functionality in something as primitive as the 30 year old GIF Construction Set. If "Grandpaware" and FOSS can do it...
Look. I get it. Serif sees threads like this and cringes. Users are greedy when they ask for stuff like onion skinning, tweening, multi-track editing, spline paths, etc. Greedy. Greedy. Greedy. If you need those features, yeah, just get a specialized app. I 100% agree.
Again, this is NOT what the great majority of us are asking for. Do you know what we really want?
1. The ability for us to see our layers side-by-side in order, timeline style.
2. The ability to manually scrub through them.
3. The ability to play them back for preview at some fixed frame rate.
That's it. That's our bare minimum.
We're not even asking for sprite sheet creation or GIF export. We can manage those tasks manually ourselves. However, simply adding in those above 3 features... That would be game changing for a lot of Affinity Photo users. At this point, without them, we're just guessing. With them included, can you imagine how many pixel art users would be breathing a collective sigh of relief?
It wouldn't make Affinity Photo an alternative to high end animation apps, but it WOULD mean that we wouldn't have to leave this one experience and clunkily enter into another.
See? No Moho or Toon Boom. Not even Aseprite or Blender. BARE MINIMUM. That's it. End users asking for more (at this point) are just being greedy.
Affinity Photo isn't an app used simply by people looking to edit their dog's head on their boss' body. It's used by creator looking to create new & unique content designed for mass consumption.
To put this into a somewhat out of context, erm, context, do you know how many Steam games exist with the tag "pixel graphics" on their store? Just over 19,000. IOW, a lot of creators prioritize some degree of timeline animation. Imagine if just a fraction of them could get done - or at least start - that work in Affinity Photo.
Bottom line, I don't expect Serif to see it my way. They know the story, what people really want, and how they're willing to devote their precious few internal resources. I expect this bare minimum request to go unfulfilled. After all, people have been asking for it for a decade plus now.
I want to fully abandon Photoshop. I *really* want to. You're just making it hard, Serif. There are a LOT more people who want this functionality than you think. Most just look at the feature list & walk away without voicing that desire. You're just hearing from a vocal minority, the ones who already bought into the Affinity ecosystem.

The delivery of the Affinity 2 Suite for free to any qualifying Education and Not for Profits will be available very shortly 

I don't recall @Patrick Connor saying anything about the post-acquisition resourcing and hiring practices of Serif/Affinity beyond "That's not for me to say, sorry, but I've seen many positive changes since the acquisition." Software takes time, good software even more so. 2.5 wasn't a stellar release, no one will argue that, but I wouldn't consider Serif/Affinity taking their time on 2.6 to be a bad thing. In fact, I'd say it's the opposite, as I'd much rather have Serif/Affinity release fewer, meaningful and bug-free (or at least fewer bugs) updates than constantly shovelling out poor release after poor release.
I think there's a lot riding on 2.6 in terms of user and market expectations, and the worst thing that could happen would be for 2.6 to be another 2.5.
It just went out this week, give it time.

The Canva acquisition was announced just four months ago. I have hired several dozen designers, developers, and related roles and it always took significantly longer than that to go from approval to hire to there being a measurable impact on production releases.