• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mqudsi

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Affinity Designer does not correctly decode the available font variants. I believe this is a regression from AD 1.5 affecting the new font panel in 1.6, but I could be wrong. Please reference the attached screenshot, showing the actually installed fonts, the font selected in AD, and the font styles available per AD. This is under Windows 10 1709. I can provide the font files in question if a private email address I can send them to is provided.
  2. Thank you both for explaining. I understand the difference between cropping and clipping, but it was @MEB's point about visibility's role in all this that cleared things up. I now understand (but still disagree with) the results that AD presents. It is a difference in how AD treats objects vs how other software might. As a vector-based program, I would expect AD to treat a filled object and an unfilled object exactly the same, except in how they appear (i.e. unfilled is "filled but with transparent background"), whereas for a pixel-based program like AP or Photoshop (where masking comes from in the first place) it makes sense for masking to work on colored vs uncolored. But when it comes to vector objects, an area "is present" when it has an enclosed path, not when it has color. For a rasterized/flattened pixel layer, AD should treat masking the way it does: by colored vs uncolored. But for vector objects, the definition of "existent" is fundamentally different, and imho only whether or not a closed shape exists and not whether it is filled with a color or has no fill should play a role.
  3. Thanks for the reply, Sean. The terminology is eluding me, but (referencing your images from here on out) I'm not understanding how the 4th image (bottom right) is correct. Each row has the same operation performed on it, each column has the same items/color. The operation performed in the second row, as demonstrated in the first column, results in the intersection of the two shapes being retained. The green fill of the rectangle does not appear anywhere in that resulting image. When the only change that is made is that the green fill is changed to no fill, we go from "intersection of the two shapes retaining the fill of the red rectangle" to "stroke of second shape in the color of the first, and the intersection of the two shapes with the (no) fill of the second shape (rectangle)." I am extremely confused how, if the only difference between operations 3 and 4 is the fill of the second shape which does not appear in the final result per image 3, do we end up with a completely different result.
  4. It seems that masking is broken in the case of an unfilled mask (i.e. fill color: none) under 1.6.2 no fill masking bug.afdesign
  5. I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. If you're asking if I have a path selected: it doesn't matter, once the bug kicks in, switching tools, selecting/deselecting paths, etc. does not impact the GPU usage.
  6. Oh, I should mention that whenever this happens the Windows DWM process is also seen taking up a non-negligible amount of GPU, and desists only when AD is exited/killed. So perhaps it has something to do with how AD is responding to a message posted to the HWND pertaining to layout management?
  7. Manually blowing away the Affinity Designer folder under Program Files and then reinstalling resolved the issue.
  8. There seems to be a bug in AD that causes some calculation or rendering to get stuck in an infinite loop, with nothing but a simple SVG with few paths and no complicated features, AD will be taking up ~50% of the available GPU while doing absolutely nothing (and even minimized). I've been noticing this problem since AD 1.5, and currently can reproduce it in the latest 1.6.1 release (which isn't to say that it didn't happen pre-1.5, of course). The only possible factor I could think of is that I've only ever seen it on high-dpi devices (with a non-100%/96dpi configuration), but I'm not sure if that's just a coincidence or not. This happens on multiple PCs with different makes and models of graphics cards (Intel, nVidia, and AMD) so it's not a GPU driver issue. Is there some sort of logging that can be enabled that would help track this down?
  9. After upgrading from the Customer Beta to the 1.6 final release and later the 1.6.1 final release, I cannot get AD to run at all. I have done a full reinstall to no avail. I have none of the conflicting 3rd party software installed. Running AD under a debugger returns the following:
  10. I'll have to try 1.6 then. I'm viewing the PDF in Illustrator, Chrome, and Sumatra PDF.
  11. The weird thing is that it exports to EPS correctly.
  12. Yeah, still broken with X-4.
  13. I can't get the attached file to export correctly as PDF. If exporting with the default "pdf for print" profile, this is what I get: If I set the rasterize property in the export options to "nothing", this is what I get: And this is what it should look like (exported to PNG): Flyer 2017.afdesign
  14. @Chris_K thanks. I don't think it's a nearest neighbor issue since whatever high resolution image I replace it with, I end up with similar problems.
  15. I should point out that if I disable downsampling for images above 450 dpi - even keeping the 85% jpeg compression enabled - the exported PDF comes out great.