h_d

If you edit a round brush (I used the 29px), go to Dynamics and set the Size Jitter to a fairly high figure controlled by Distance: You can paint strokes like this: It's not very controllable though: you'd probably have better luck with a graphics tablet and the controller set to Pressure.

Not personally, but search these forums for Digital Asset Management (or DAM) and you'll find some suggestions.

The 'long names' are the filenames in the Apple Photos database structure: (Not to be messed with under any circs...) 100% agree with this.

A couple of side-thoughts on this. 1) Your problems are not connected with your machine, or your OS, or iCloud, or the length of the filename. 2) I've used the workflow outlined above almost every day for the years over different versions of macOS and different machines and apart from a few teething problems many years back it's always worked really well. 3) The Media>Photos option in the macOS Open dialog works if you want to embed images in another application (for example Apple Pages). But using it to open images for direct editing is going to lead to the problems you have experienced. 4) The name you're seeing in Apple Photos (R0000504.JPG) is the Image Display Name, not the file name. It is the same as name of the original file you imported from your camera/memory card (unless you change it to something more descriptive in Apple Photos). But the actual permanent file name (in the Apple Photos database) is 3B9C7E25-D523-41AC-B7BC-8624BB149A6A.jpg. As @R C-R says, "Sharing" back to Apple Photos will create a new image file with a new file name, generated by Affinity Photo and based on the current date and time, which will be used by Apple Photos as the display name of the image. This will be a duplicate of the original. 5) Images edited in Affinity Photo using the workflow I've described retain their original display name and underlying database file name. They have the added bonus that in the Apple Photos' browser window they display a little icon that looks like three sliders: to indicate that they've been edited. The fact that you can't see it if there's sky or any sort of light background at the top of the image is one of the less impressive elements of Apple's UI design. (The other icon indicates that the image has an associated GPS position.)

Apple Photos has its own internal database of images, thumbnails, originals, edited versions, dates, more. Without going into a lot of detail, if you go through the route you describe, making edits and trying to save it back into Photos, you risk at least creating duplicates (as you've found) or at worst knackering your Apple Photos database. I would strongly advise you not to continue with that way of working. The simplest and safest workflow if you want to edit Apple Photos images in Affinity Photos is to start in Apple Photos itself. Find the image you want to edit in the Apple Photos browser, click once on it to select it, then press the Enter key to switch to Apple Photos' editing environment. Now click on the three dots in the top right corner of the editing screen and choose Edit in Affinity Photo: Make your edits in Affinity Photo, save and close. No need to flatten the image or anything - Affinity Photo knows it's an Apple Photos image and will do that in the background. You'll now be taken to a screen in which you are asked if you want to save back into Apple Photos: Click the Save Changes button in the top right and this will take you back to the Apple Photos editing environment. Click Done and your changes will be saved as the edited version in Apple Photos. You can revert it to the original in Apple Photos by clicking the Revert to Original button in Apple Photos' editing environment: ADD: Another word of warning: don't be tempted to right-click on images in Apple Photos browser window and choose "Edit with Affinity Photo". Again, it will cause you more trouble than it's worth. Reasons here.

Draw the first one, duplicate the next four in place with four whacks of cmd-j (macOS) or ctrl-j (Windows): Select the top one in the Layers stack and drag it down on the document to where you want it to be in relation to the large rectangle: Select all the small rectangles (but not the large one), then Layer>Alignment>Space Vertically: Enabling Snap to Guides helps keep things lined up.

...not quite understanding how the CRT works. 😉 From the Help: In your first example (white on red) the white foreground colour has no hue, so the hue is removed from the red leaving just its saturation and lightness values (ie grey). The same thing will happen if you set the foreground colour to black. The tool needs a foreground colour, not an 'absence of colour', to work as intended. In your second example (aqua on red) the red has slightly varying hues, and the CRT is picking up only those values that match the point where you first click. You may get closer results to your intention if you check Sample continuously in the context menu bar, or adjust the Tolerance level: (TBH though I reckon the CRT is a bit of a blunt instrument, and if you want to change the colour of the red brushstroke while leaving the white background unchanged, you would have more control applying an HSL Shift Adjustment to the red area.)

All I know is that the Disk Usage Warning limit can be changed in Settings>Performance. These are the defaults: The help files don't offer much useful information: How large is your Publisher document? Are the images linked or embedded?

FWIW, it's the word 'Frontal' transliterated into the Greek alphabet. (Latin uses Latin script, as do we.)

Might be the baseline grid overriding the leading. What happens if you turn it off at document level via View>Baseline Grid...: You might also want to check Ignore Baseline Grid in Window>Text>Text Frame

I believe it may work with a jailbroken Nokia E6.

An alternative approach is to pin an image in its own paragraph, with the alignment set to centred : Screen Recording 2024-07-27 at 15.22.02.mov I copied and pasted this one in then adjusted the size to suit. It's a raster image but pretty good quality and doesn't show much pixellation even at high magnification. The image is from Vecteezy.

Use the 'burger bar' (three lines just above the red box in your screen shot) to create a preset. This should then 'stick' for subsequent exports.

This setting will give you an immediate word count with filler text.

Last thought... Even if you do successfully open the file with the two layers as I have done, they will be totally independent of each other. Affinity Photo treats them as two separate pixel layers, and modifying the depth map layer has no effect on the image layer. As far as I can see, the image layer as displayed in Affinity Photo has already had the depth map applied and baked in.

I don't know how you are opening the file in Affinity. Are you definitely opening the .heic (by double-clicking, or by right-clicking and choosing Open with Affinity Photo 2)? If you create a new untitled document and then File>Place, you won't see the depth map: Also, I don't know if the following setting makes any difference but it might be worth trying: Beyond that, I'm out of ideas 😞

Works for me (macOS 14.5, Affinity Photo 2.5.3):

You may need to adjust the Screen tolerance depending on your preferred zoom level.

I can edit the auto-generated text in both Photo and Publisher. But I could not search on it in an .afphoto document opened (not placed) in Publisher. However... I have since changed my Affinity Photo settings under General - Text and checked 'Insert filler text as text'. (I already had this checked in Publisher.) This text can now be searched when the document is opened in Publisher. Sorted:

I tested that before my original posting and it didn't work for me (APub 2.5.3, macOS 14.5). Publisher doesn't seem to search frame text created by Affinity Photo in an .afphoto documents: (Publisher does however find and replace text if the text frame in the .afphoto document is created in Publisher itself. Seems slightly buggy to me...)

I fear in this instance Google is not your friend Your search is leading you to the online help for Affinity Publisher. As far as I'm aware there is no Find and Replace text functionality in Affinity Photo.

I have corrected my original post. Snapping the rectangular selection to guides is possible, with a bit of setting up. First, go to View>Snapping. Check Enable snapping. Set the Screen tolerance to a high figure (I chose 25, but it may need experimentation). Uncheck Only snap to visible objects. Check Snap to guides: Your pink guides are column guides and I'm pretty sure (!) they don't snap. To replace them with blue guides, first go to View>Show Margins and make sure it's checked. Now select the move tool. You can now drag blue guides from the document margins and they should snap to your existing pink grid. Once you have replicated the grid, you can go back to View>Snapping and set the column guides to 0 - 0. You can adjust the position of your blue grid numerically here if you need to. You should now find that the Rectangular Marquee Tool snaps to the blue guides. Apologies for my misleading initial first post.

Hi @Vici0usK1LL and welcome! As far as I'm aware the marquee selection tool does not snap to anything. Wrong, h_d. It does snap to guides (but apparently not column guides) if the Snap settings are correct. You don't say which OS or which Affinity app you're using, but this is a suggestion for Affinity Photo/either OS. Draw a rectangle with a coloured fill and no stroke. The colour doesn't matter. Snap it to your grid square. With the rectangle layer selected, choose Select>Selection from Layer and Delete. This will leave a 'marching ants' selection aligned to your grid square. The procedure is similar in Designer but you would have to switch into Pixel Persona after drawing the rectangle, cmd-click (macOS) on the layer to create a selection marquee, then manually delete the layer.

I personally would place the white box behind the text, like this: The Gaussian Blur is in Layer Effects (click the FX button at the bottom of the Layers panel). Uncheck Preserve alpha to give the blurred edge.

I suppose it's just conceivable (though pretty unlikely) that you have the margins set to 0. This would have the same effect: