thomaso

With what method did you uninstall? I would expect from a "proper" uninstall to get all related files removed – without the need to delete them manually. This might contain the required path … – while I wonder if .afpalette files (used as application palette) possibly are stored in a .propcol file once they got imported to the panel? (To me on mac in V1 it seems to be the "fills.propcol")

… and get the artwork clipped by the rectangle? I'd rather keep the guide objects separated from the layout items in the panel's hierarchy. If grouped, they can easily get switched on/off all together, also snapping with invisible objects can get activated separately. Indeed, I would expect guides to display their position as an immediate tooltip (like with snapping). Apart from guide objects as layer items: If you have APub + APh you could use the Info Panel in the photo persona, it permanently displays the cursor x/y coordinates without the need for additional user interaction.

Doesn't it work via the Table Panel with its stroke options for frame versus cell, while cells may get their edges handled separately and varying with the selected cells.

I wonder if Pixel Alignment would be relevant at all in this topic about a pixel brush stroke & copies of it, considering that a drawn stroke hardly is fully pixel aligned and rather always antialiased just because of its brush size & range of pixel coordinates within a layout. Below the green was painted + moved + rasterized with 'Force Pixel Alignment' OFF, for the orange it was ON. Finally they don't differ in a way that would tell whether FPA has been off or on during the workflow. Note, the orange layer which was moved pixel aligned results in a decimal position after rasterizing. In various attempts I notice after rasterizing for objects with FPA set to ON a slightly smoother, more antialiased or blurred result than without the forced alignment – but depending on the individual goal this may be appreciated or disturbing / unwanted by the user. – So, to me, it doesn't seem to be obviously necessary nor generally recommend to have the setting always ON. – Apart from or maybe because of the known pixel alignment bug AFB-4917. pixel brush force align.m4v

Didn't the OP already try this when they mentioned:

The OP (+ the first response) seems to experience crashes, though it's unclear with what print setting:

For operations / properties that require an image layer. For instance to make it appear in the Resource Manager, with the option to make it linked | or to use it as "smart" object with the mentioned behaviour when scaled | or to apply a stroke or fill colour / … The Help says about "Image Layers": Image layers retain all of the data from the original image, which remains intact when the document is exported. An image layer has a container which retains the placed image's original colour space, resolution and physical dimensions (when placed at native resolution). Image layers can be recoloured much like an opened image or a pixel layer. If an image layer is drawn on, the layer will be rasterised and will adopt pixel layer properties. Rasterisation is required to convert the image to the document's colour space.

Just in case: The thought / issue of upsizing a rasterized layer does not match the situation of your initial post. Other than a layer of type "image", if you "create new Pixel layer" + draw "with a paintbrush" it always happens rasterized and in the current document resolution. Means, in particular in this thread's scenario any rasterizing of this layer or its copies does not affect these layer's resolution, here rasterization is just used to merge the layers. Whereas for brush strokes rasterizing may get relevant if you paint with a (texture) brush on a vector layer and rasterize that. Also it may confuse if you make use of the useful option to turn a pixel layer into an image layer, then, of course, upsizing this image layer isn't "smart", different to original image layers with a sufficient resolution.

APub, AD, APh – "our perfectly balanced mixture" Ja, leider ist Kümmelbrot oft nur outgesourct available, oder ganz vom Markt weggeregelt, wie orangefarbene Autos, Münzfernsprecher, Latzhosen, Fixogum, Letraset, uvm …

Lecker! – But what's that sign at their door?

That was not the OP's question, right? For them, with the correct date criteria, it should work to sort as desired, regardless of the app or file system. Apart from that, it appears even more complex, as this discussion shows https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php?topic=12165.0 . The number of possible dates + places where they occur or are stored is larger than our mentioned 2–4 dates. While the first response says "all the time tags, as that would be excessive, since that would write about 90+ tags", these 12 are a small selection only: EXIF:CreateDate EXIF:DateTimeOriginal EXIF:ModifyDate IPTC:DigitalCreationDate+IPTC:DigitalCreationTime PTC:DateCreated+IPTC:TimeCreated XMP-exif:DateTimeDigitized XMP-exif:DateTimeOriginal XMP-photoshop:DateCreated XMP-xmp:CreateDate XMP-xmp:ModifyDate GPS:GPSDateStamp+GPS:GPSTimeStamp (adjusted for local timezone) System:FileModifyDate

"I can't tell you the way to the bakery (not sure we have one) – but I know a nice walk to the hairdresser, which proves the beauty of our village." 😎

"Creation Date" and "Modification Date" are two pair of socks. (luckily). To sort your files you could use the wanted parameter (e.g. in macOS -> Finder you can choose them as separate columns). In Affinity (APub) I noticed that "Save As…" creates a document with a new creation date entry in the Fields panel. I haven't tried with APh if it will create an according EXIF entry, the Metadata panel in APub's Photo persona seems not to display either (but shows dates in the Fields panel).

@Return, your workflow with a nested pixel layer may reduce the need to group or create a Layer layer first but it needs to start with a pixel layer without transparency. For the OP's initial description (paintbrush stroke on a new pixel layer) it wouldn't work: the copy gets clipped by its parent if nested, invisible where they don't overlap. (below I coloured the brush layer copy to make it visible)

This seems less 'simple' than grouping because it requires the extra step to move the wanted layers to the new Layer.

It maybe easier to achieve without an app switch: In AD select the layers you want to merge -> group them -> right-click this group layer -> choose "Rasterize…".

HSL adjustment & Scope panel -> Vectorscope -> i-line For easier control: Info panel to placed samplers on the image.

Maybe this Serif info is helpful: "In rare cases this message can appear if you have another in Affinity V2 app open that's in a Not-Responding state, such as processing a large document. You will have to wait for the other app to finish what it's doing before you can open another V2 app. If you suspect the app has hung, you will need to force quit the app before another Affinity V2 app can start."

For future use it is easier to return to a certain panel arrangement if you have it saved as a "Studio Preset". If you don't find the option in the menus you can type "preset" as search term in the "Help" menu to get various menu items listed, one of them says "Add", hovering over it will open + highlight the according menu. Below an example in APub V1.

… and, then the saved file will not use the same settings (e.g. JPG compression) as your initial file but more an 'Affinity best quality'.

If you name the symbols individually you can select all of them by name and get the number of selected objects displayed in the upper left corner.

Isn't this the goal? "Jun 13, 2018 – Calm meditation app to add sleep stories narrated by Bob Ross. – The dulcet tones of Bob Ross are coming to a phone near you." https://mobilesyrup.com/2018/06/13/calm-app-bob-ross-sleep-stories/ And in German TV the series runs at 1:15 or 5:30 am, right into the public "Valley of Tranquility". -

Ah, thanks for the description of a possible workflow, maybe I was mislead by the term "style copies" and it seems @Old Bruce gave the right answer to avoid additional styles in the panel caused by assets. If @elk feels that their assets produce "more and more redundant styles" in a document I wonder for what purpose the assets got saved with saved styles (= entries in the Text Styles panel) if the styles should not get used as such but are actually unwanted for the assets? In this case it would be useful to replace the assets in the panel by modified versions that got their text detached from the saved styles via their style's burger menus.

If you delete a style (– without detaching* it first from any text –) then the text automatically changes its look and either gets its parent or the [No Style] assigned. Thus I wouldn't call it 'simplier', to me the missing "replace with style" option rather feels like a bug, since it forces the user to risk a change in the text appearance anywhere in a document when deleting a style – unless you selected a menu option to *detach the style before deleting it, whereas to get the menu option to detach the style from any text the user has to have the text selected first.

What type of snow / frozen look? – A simple sample: 1 brush | opacity 90% | inner shadow.