Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

About VIPStephan

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,473 profile views
  1. Currently we have a control point on the heart shape to control the height of the lobes. Would it be possible to add a second control point at the bottom tip of the heart shape so that the radius/curvature of the bottom of the heart can be modified easily?
  2. For the records I’m going to cross-link a feature request about this here:
  3. For the records I’m going to cross-link a respective feature request here:
  4. I’m going to add my vote. I would like to be able to align nested items to their parent objects, like constraint groups etc.
  5. Yes, could be. I have AD in German and couldn’t be bothered to change the language and restart it. 😛
  6. Also, the legacy software was Windows only, and Affinity was designed specifically for Mac, initially. Only after the initial success of AD they decided to port this to Windows, too, and abandon the old Plus series completely (at least that’s what it looked like from an outsider’s perspective).
  7. Guys, make sure to check the SVG export presets, especially the “reduce transformations” checkbox. As to your 800×600 rect element, @gafvert, this is because apparently you exported the whole artboard. Try to select just the objects you want to export, then do File → Export and there is a select field towards the bottom of the export dialog where you should select “selection without background” as export area. Alternatively, create a slice from your objects in the export persona and export only this slice, not the whole artboard.
  8. It could be that this has been discussed in the past already, I don’t remember, but in the colours panel you can select the sliders view, and then there is a select field for RGB and RGB hex with the only real difference that there is a hex value field below the sliders. And I’m thinking: is it really necessary to have two views? Couldn’t they be combined into one with the RGB numbers being shown next to the sliders and the HEX field below? This also applies to colours in the fill and border panels on shapes. Also, there is so much empty space next to the HEX field that could be used for two buttons to copy the HEX or RGB values quickly (see attached mock-up). That would be better than the current hidden option behind the button at the top right.
  9. The problem appears to have been fixed, thanks. 😊
  10. The username field is still not focused automatically when clicking the sign-in link; this is annoying the hell out of me. 😠 How about using another browser, like Firefox? Gives you no ads, too, with the appropriate extensions. And can be themed as minimal as you like.
  11. I’m having the same problem since I upgraded my OS to Catalina, and this is happening when I’m hiding the studio with the TAB key; when I bring it back the toolbar stays invisible. There is no way to get it back other than resetting on startup.
  12. Ooooh, I see. It’s so simple, but I didn’t think that I had to rasterize the layer before. Thanks. Edit: Yet, it still seems to “blur” the edges when resizing; this becomes more apparent if the selection is very narrow, and you resize it on the narrow axis. Is there any way to keep hard edges?
  13. As I’m coming from Adobe Fireworks I’m sometimes still struggling with muscle memory (or memory in general). In FW it is simple to draw a rectangle marquee over an image, for example, and then copy and paste this selection into a new raster object, or, to drag a marquee, switch to the transform tool, and be able to transform that selection (e. g. stretch a part of the image) right there. How would something like this be done in AD? In AD, I’ve been able to extract part of an image with the workaround of duplicating the image, using the vector crop tool and rasterizing the result. But now, if I resize the object it is adding semi-transparency to the edges; in Fireworks I was also used to being able to resize/stretch such an object while keeping hard edges. What am I missing here? Or am I thinking this from the wrong side?
  14. @MdmMTL, from looking at the images you posted, it seems like you would rather need Affinity Designer than Affinity Photo, because all of this looks more like vector art. Photoshop is often “misused” as general graphic design tool just because people are used to it (and has therefore als evolved into a bloated “jack of all trades”) where other tools, like Illustrator, would actually be the better tool for the job. Likewise, if you are creating graphic art, Affinity Designer is the tool that is more suited for the job. And regarding this: This can only be true if you compare one monthly installment for AI and PS with the price for an eternal license of AP and AD. Historically, Photoshop alone has cost around $800 per eternal license, if I remember correctly. That’s way more than the $50–$60 you’d pay for Affinity Photo, for an eternal license. And given that you’d now “rent” PS you’d pay more over time than for owning AP.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.