Jump to content

Hangman

Members
  • Content Count

    393
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Hangman

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

900 profile views
  1. The issue seems to relate to the arrows in the graphics. Export Size When you export the first graphic (on the left), at the point where you choose 'Selection without background' the size for the selected exported graphic, prior to you scaling it is 328px x 230px which makes sense because the 1pt stroke on your grey rectangle is set as 'Stroke to outside' so when allowing for the 2pt additional width and height together with the 'rounding' of the non integer X and Y coordinates of the grey rectangle this size is correct. However, exporting your second graphic you'll note that when choosing 'Selection without background' the second graphic size is 360px x 230px (i.e. 32px wider) despite both grey rectangles being identically sized with their 1pt strokes set to 'Outside'. This is the cause of the difference in the exported sizes between the two graphics when you are scaling the width to 800px wide, i.e. the source aspect ratios when 'Selection without background' is selected is different despite the actual grey recatangles being identical in size. The cause appears to be the arrows, I'm assuming they've been created as lines with an Ending Arrow. When you uncheck the arrow layers for both graphics so they are no longer visible and repeat the exports, both graphics, when exported using the 'Selection without background' are identical in size and aspect ratio and therefore scale to the same size as well. When the arrows are visible, the greater the 'arrow' is scaled, the greater the width of the exported graphic, despite the arrow bounding boxes being contained within the grey rectangle. If you scale the arrows up, the exported graphic width increases. If you 'Expand Stroke' for both arrows the problem goes away and both graphics again export at the same size, so the issue appears to be related to 'arrow scaling' which I assume is a bug?
  2. Hi MiaPSU, It looks as though the issue is realted to the graduations which feature in both the Illustrator created arrows. Can you upload the .ai file so we can take a look?
  3. Not that it's a great help but for every mm the second artboard is offset from the first artboard in both axes, the nested graphic, regardless of what it is, is negatively offset by a factor of 10.948810 (or 10.94880973975937 to be more precise) in both the X and Y axes less the X/Y offset of the same graphic on the second artboard itself. Taking the sample file, the second artboard is positioned at 1,112.151994 mm on the X axis and the map graphic is positioned at 253.965999 mm on the X axis in relation to the second artboard itself. When the map and the non nested underlying rounded rectangle are grouped, the map is now positioned at minus 12,176.740584 mm Which equates to X = ((1,112.151994 mm x 10.948810) - 253.965999 mm) or an X position of minus 11,922.774874 mm If the second artboard sits directly on top of the first, then grouping the two items works as expected but offset the second artboard by any value in either or both axes and when the nested map is grouped with the underlying, non nested graphic, the X/Y offset factor is always the same, i.e. 10.948810 in both axes. Move the second artboard further to the right and then group the map and the underlying non nested rounded rectangle and the map is offset negatively even further but still by the same factor. It seems to be related to the map being nested, if you move the underlying rounded rectangle so it appears as part of the same nested group as the map then grouping the two together works as expected regardless of the position of the second artboard.
  4. 1) It is Locating, as in jumping to the relevant page and selecting the relevant graphic, so this is not an issue (apologies if I didn't make that part clear in my original post). 2) This is definitely an issue and certainly not expected behaviour but good to know it has already been reported as an issue/bug. 3) I'm not experiencing this issue however hard I try, maybe I'm missing something here? Re clicking Yes to update all files automatically, Walt pointed this out it a different post, personally I think this should also be an option in the Resourse Manager as well. resource_selection.mp4
  5. I have to agree, to my 'logical' brain, I would have expected that functionality from within Resource Manager as well!
  6. Thanks Walt, not entirely sure how I missed that, makes perfect sense now... blinkered vision me thinks 🙂
  7. If you have a Publisher document containing Linked images/graphics and for whatever reason the images/graphics have been moved or their containing folder renamed, selecting a Missing image/graphic in the Resource Manager list and then clicking Locate in Document results in the first item in the Resource Manager list now becoming the Missing image/graphic selection, rather than the item originally selected making it very easy to inadvertently Replace the wrong graphic. This only happens when the currently viewed page in the Publisher document is not the Locate in Document page. resource_manager.mp4
  8. Not sure if I'm missing something obvious but if I have a my Publisher document and a folder containing all the Linked images/graphics used within the Publisher document both contained within the same folder and then I decide at a later date (after creating my document) to simply rename the folder containing my images/graphics, resouce manager doesn't: Give me the option to Update, only the option to Replace Allow me to Update or Replace all images/graphics in one go When I Replace the first image, I would have expected Publisher to be intelligent enough to automatically recognise all the other now Missing images/graphics within the renamed folder because their file names have not changed and provide the option via a dialogue window to automatically ask if I want to update them. Currently you have to select each image/graphic individually and then select Replace which is painful in a document containing hundreds of images/graphics. Having the preference 'Automatically update linked resources when externally' ticked in the Genral preferences, obviously only applies if a graphic has been modified but doesn't accommodate a simple folder name change. I hope this is something that will be improved moving forward, unless it's already there and I've missed it.
  9. I've seen numerous bug reports relating to issues with the Add Boolean function so this may well be something that the team are already aware off (apologies if that is the case), though Matt mentioned in March 2020 that "Boolean operations between two objects where one of them was rotated were already known and fixed" in 1.82. I'm still seeing an issue with rotated objects (specifically rectangles, i.e. the same is not true following the same procedure when using the ellipse tool)) and the Add Boolean operation which exists in 1.7.3 and 1.8.3. I've attached a short screen recording. When the second rectangle is rotated +90˚ the add function doesn't give the correct result when the Add Boolean is applied, yet when rotated -90˚ all works as expected. Converting both rectangles to curves prior to applying the Boolean Add operation makes no difference and neither does reversing the direction of the curve on the second rectangle after rotating +90˚. Boolean_Add_Operation.mp4 Add Boolean.afdesign
  10. These were simply document palette's .afpalette files exported onto an internal hard drive from any of the apps. I just happened to rename one in the finder and then re-import it which is when I noticed that the imported palette maintained it's original name rather than the new name I'd given it. I guess it makes sense having the palette name embedded in the file as testing a .ase palette which doesn't, simply names the imported palette 'Colour Group 1' which results in renaming it anyway once imported. I was just curious as to why the format doesn't adopt the filename itself in a similar fashion to any other renamed file but then I don't know that much about the logic of colour palettes in that respect.
  11. Just wondering if there is a logical reason why Affinity Software doesn't recognise the palette name if the palette is renamed in the finder on macOS. It seems that the palette name created with any Affinity software is embedded in the file itself and so subsequently isn't updated when changed in the finder which means it is only possible to change the name within Affinity software. No biggy but just curious to understand whether this is by design?
  12. It would be great if it were possible to have multi-layer live perspective projection rather than only being able to apply a perspective grid to a single layer in an Affinity Photo file. Whilst it appears possible to add live projection perspective grids to different layers within the same file, when jumping between layers the perspective grid adjustment only adheres to the first layer it is applied to. Going back to subsequent layers where a grid adjustment has been applied results in the perspective adjustments being lost. This in effect means that if working/editing a 360 degree rotation image with say 36 or 72 individual photographs making up the rotation, the only way you can achieve this is to set up the respective number of Affinity Photo files rather than maintaining everything in a single document. I appreciate you could apply a perspective grid, add your graphic and merge the layers down and then repeat layer by layer, each time re-adding your graphic, but that seems very inefficient. What would be perfect would be the ability to set one or multiple live projection perspective grids per layer and then have a single embedded graphic sitting at the top of the layer stack, e.g. an Affinity Designer file and for the graphic to automatically adjust to the individual perspective grids applied to each layer once the relevant layer is made visible. The icing on the cake of course would be for Live Perspective Projections to remain live so you don't have to merge them down with the respective applied graphic prior to exporting. This way it would then be possible to simply swap out or have multiple graphics layers which when made visible in the layers panel are automatically applied to the rotating object, so if you have one rotating object which you wanted to apply a dozen different logo's to, you could set up the live perspective projection grids once for each of the 36 or 72 layers, embed all twelve logos at the top of the layer stack and then simply turn on the respective layer and the relevant logo for it to be applied to all layers below. Then the cherry on top would be if macro capabilities were expanded allowing the ability to make individually defined layers visible e.g. Layer one logo and layer two, first photo in the stack, export the file to a defined file format, size, resolution etc and then switch layer two off and layer three on, export and repeat for each layer in the file until all defined layers are exported. Hope these can be added as a feature requests...
  13. I don't believe that's how it's supposed to work, it didn't work that way in 1.7.X, there using any method of zoom updates the percentage shown in the Pan toolbar correctly.
  14. Hi Walt, I could of course do that, though it sort of negates the idea of using Affinity Photo as my 'software of choice'. To be honest I think the majority of what I need to do with the files will 'likely' be compatible with how the relevant layers and effects work in Photoshop but until I've created the files and tested them I won't know for sure which was the reason for my original question. I guess my question really realted to how much it is possible to rely on the PSD export option within Photo for file compatibility and whilst I appreciate there is never going to be 100% compatibility between the two programs, in my mind I would like to understand where the real issues and incompatibilities lie so I know what I can and can't reasonably expect. The whole idea is really ideally 'not' to have to 'invest' or 'rent' Photoshop as it makes the move to Affinity Photo kind of redundant (although I do use it for other projects) but I do understand there is no one easy answer to my original question but maybe as a result of this project I can build my own list of incompatibilities and share with the forum.
  15. Thanks to all for your feedback, it's pretty much what I anticipated but it's always good to receive clarification on a thought process. I agree that 'renting' photoshop for a month is the sensible solution to ensure complete compatibility, even if that does mean having to adjust the Affinity Photo generated PSD files in Photoshop in the process and I think, in this instance, is the approach I will adopt... Many thanks to all for taking the time to reply.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. 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.