Petar Petrenko

@Petar Petrenko Doesn't RC just stand for "Release Candidate", meaning that it is a candidate for going live since it is stable enough? You might have been overthinking it a little. ^^

But they take hundreds of them to pick only one or two successful...

WOW

I feel your pain because our political parties in the UK are a total bunch of ....

Probably a very large amount of people are of the same mind

I resize about the same as you per day haha. I produce over one hundred printed publications and about 2000 adverts a year. Right now I have 165 current projects on the go. Just little old me. The smallest inefficiency in workflow adds up to massive amounts of time wasted with needless mouse clicks amid quirky interfaces.
Below is my current load. Each one of those is a 36 page printed publication averaging about 10 adverts each. EVERY single image needs resizing and adjusting. I need efficient software.

I'm on the fence with you.

I'm not prepared to suffer all that, rather than getting frustrated and irritated each time I resize a photo (which is between 1-20 per day) I have decided never to do that task in AP,  I don’t believe they will ever re-program that feature, which was doomed from the beginning, I don't believe that they are unaware of its shortcomings.

I did, this shows the correct list of presets which is the same on my PC here -

I'm going to have to investigate this further with one of our developers as I'm not certain how the presets can be showing in the master but not in the adjustment window, please bare with me here! 

The worst possibility is that it is of design (but with a simple bug, which means they will never reconsider the overall inadequacy of the design - so we will still prefer photoshop for resizing.

I can't remember the number versions so I'm probably wrong on 'prior to 1.0'. What i meant was i was part of the public beta's for all the apps prior to release and even before Photo was officially released as non beta retail I had the issue that we are discussing but Affinity say is by design. Hence, I'm assuming, why its still not been fixed and now simply gets ignored.
Basically we have a very expensive RIP that throws a wobbly if any images are below 300dpi. Due to Affinity's bug AND implementation of document resize I can't get any images past it so I'm unable to use Affinity Photo. Simple as that.

I have applied in "future "suggestions for affinity photo that they completely redesign "Resize Document".
It's a pity more people didn't complain from the outset (whenever it was exactly).
I think we should be united and insistent. 

Friends, artists, peers, 
I agree that the Affinity team needs to understand our concerns properly, but unfortunately, they are convinced that the approach they took on "Resizing Document" was correct from the outset, and they will not realize that it is fundamentally misconceived. They do not address the users requirements correctly, somehow they must come to understand by example, that the solution provided by Photoshop's correct and that they should aim for the same functionality. The Affinity team is under the misconception that we users are just used to Photoshop by habit, and we should get accept the AP approach. Affinity needs to put together a suitable brainstorming team that will come up with the correct solution by looking outside their own self-made box instead of hammering nails into it, even though this will involve candid modesty and a lot of re-programming. They need to start by properly studying Photoshop's approach and the users' real needs.
I don't know which is the best forum to post this perhaps you can post it where you think it may be read by the most appropriate people
David

The "Resize Document" procedure has been intentionally designed this way, and it is not considered to be a bug. Unfortunately there is is a huge misconception and misunderstanding on the behalf of the Affinity Photo team, regarding necessary functions required by photo editors and designers. We need to be able to change size versus resolution, while we make the decisions of what we aim for, but the application should make the necessary calculations, Photoshop "Resize Document" has had it right for many years, I think that Affinity should have realized this and tried to produce similar results, it was clear from the 1st A.P. that they got it wrong, and now they are continuing to develop the app based on the same mistake. (the crop tool also suffers in part from the same fundamental flaw).  Please re-think the approach based on functionality, flexibility, accuracy, user-friendliness. BTW Some of my associates (and probably many more) are still using Photoshop just for resizing documents (and cropping) while using Affinity photo for the rest of the job. I am not sure that this is the best place to post this request, perhaps future requests?

It looks like surrounded with ammunition for stapler.

I’ve created a macro that can simulate the look of Infrared Photography. It expands on the method that James outlined in his tutorial video, adding a few additional flourishes. The macro is attached and can be imported into Affinity Photo.

To import the macro, select the “hamburger” icon at the top, right of the Library panel. Choose “Import Macros…”



Start by choosing a Pixel layer. Click the macro and you will get a lovely infrared-looking image.

1) If you adjust the opacity of the layer named “Infrared Inverted” you can add more or less color to the image.
2) True infrared images have a softness and graininess to them. Because of that, I have included a Noise layer and a Diffuse Glow layer. Feel free to adjust them, or turn them off.
3) If the image has too much pink to suit your liking, open the HSL layer and switch to the Reds. Lower the Saturation until the pinkish color is muted or gone.
4) I have placed a Lens Filter adjustment at the top of the layer stack. It is a blue filter, which will cool the image a bit. By default, it is turned off. Turn it back on to apply it.

Here is the macro in action:


 
Infrared.afmacros.zip

Designer is vector based app like Illustrator or CorelDRAW and Publisher is layout app like InDesign or QuarkXPress.

I think it is a good idea to have an "Artboards" pannel in Designer same as we have "Pages" in Publisher. Because, in a way, they represent a kind of pages in Designer.
This way we can have very nice visual presentation of the artboards and they will not share a room with layers in the same pannel and make a confusion because they are not layers.

I think it is a good idea to have an "Artboards" pannel in Designer same as we have "Pages" in Publisher. Because, in a way, they represent a kind of pages in Designer.
This way we can have very nice visual presentation of the artboards and they will not share a room with layers in the same pannel and make a confusion because they are not layers.

Is it a joke, or what? They don't work for me. How did you make them work?

To get rid of the transparency :  Document > Clip Canvas
"according to the selected color" : Do you mean a colored border ? If so, delete the selection and  then Clip Canvas

Actually I have noticed it is very inconsistent. It works but VERY rarely. Most times it simply increases the document size. Im glad its not just me being daft. Since the Beta version Ive had this problem and just thought it was me not understanding how Affinity are implementing it. I have to use Photoshop to check files are correct so then I simply end up just using Photoshop.
I agree. You should be able to see the pixel dimensions alongside the print size so you can tell right away what's actually happening. Its daft having to set the units to pixels then open resize again set the units to centimetres just to check that its done what you wanted it to do. In my case it rarely does.
As much as I love Affinity's products there are a few illogical decisions on a few items that just don't make sense and slow down your workflow. The eyedropper implementation and the tab sequence in the transform window two good examples. It tabs from X position to Width to Y position to Height. Whats all that about?! Anyway im getting off topic in my own thread lol.

Designer is vector based app like Illustrator or CorelDRAW and Publisher is layout app like InDesign or QuarkXPress.

Designer is vector based app like Illustrator or CorelDRAW and Publisher is layout app like InDesign or QuarkXPress.

There seems to be a bug in the older 1.7.0 Publisher beta versions (.337 and .371 have been mentioned, I think) that enables the new Personas when the retail versions of 1.7 Photo and Designer are installed. That does not occur with the current beta version, .376.