Bri-Toon

The thing I'm confused about is how you are able to convert your file from CMYK to sRGB without any issues. I would think the final result would look the same as the CMYK.

I'm confused. I can't test this since my beta expired, but there is another Split view in a UI panel?

Hmm... I haven't tested this is Affinity yet because of my fear of losing color quality. When I used Illustrator, I could change the color mode from RGB to CMYK, and the color values update right away. However, if I changed the color mode from CMYK to RGB, the color values did NOT update. In a case like that, I was stuck with dull color values which couldn't be modified.

Not a problem. I almost uploaded another screenshot too. :P What Alfred indicated in his post is the answer. Those three buttons on the top left of your workspace (not all the way left) are different view modes. With a button selected, the preview will be shown. Click the button again to go back. Ronnyb, Is this not working for you?

Well semantically speaking, I do still think Affinity Photo is pretty complex. Perhaps just not as complex as 3D software. It is made a whole lot easier. However, the part you quoted from me was actually in regards to my point that Affinity Photo is different from Photoshop but looks similar.

Isn't HitFilm though an alternative to After Effects?

SrPx, Vjsouza isn't the only one. I actually find RGB better to work with than CMYK. I just be sure to change it to sRGB when I export to PDF or PNG. Unless I have some major printing job ahead of me, I don't think I have too much to worry about it in regards to its quality.

If this is considered, I would also like to suggest the idea to isolate objects from a clipped shape. Pressing Ctrl + Click is useful, but not when I need to create a bounding box to select bunches in clipped areas.

Hello GrahamMYC, Good news. Affinity is interested in making a digital asset manager. It was mentioned in the FAQs topic.

I'm sorry that there hasn't been a response yet. On the bottom of the two views are two indicators. Click on an indicator, and then click on the view you desire from the context toolbar.

I think this is useful depending on how many layers you have for effects. If you have multiple effects on just one layer, it shouldn't be too time consuming. Hiding the effect in the Effects panel will not change its properties if shown later. Something else you can try: If you use multiple layers, combine them into one to make a set of sublayers. Then in the route layer, add the necessary effects.

Hello everyone. I did some exploring, and unfortunately, that feature in the promotion video is not a vector pattern, so there is nothing really misleading. It is an embedded symbol. I cannot test this for myself since my beta has expired (I'm waiting to get my new computer before I make my purchase), but here is a video on how to imitate what was shown in the promotion video. As I said, it is not a vector pattern, so you do have to make several duplicates. It looks like we've all misunderstood this, but I guess we just made assumptions since this 'looks' like a pattern.

I have forgotten about Resolve. I saved it on my bookmarks a while back, but I didn't follow up on it because there were no screenshots or tutorials at the time. That looks pretty neat and a lot easier to use than the head-itching Premiere. The base version is free? What? There have been years of people reviewing the best free video editor. Why was this never on the list then while crappy programs like Windows Live Movie Maker were?

Well on a good note, for those who want to accomplish something very similar, making fills out of pixel selections sounds like the next best thing. I am just hoping that there is a way to make selections more precise in between overlapping curves.

Aside from animation and getting back to video editing, have you guys ever heard of Movavi? They are doing very well. It runs on both Windows and Mac, it has most of the important features, and the price isn't that bad.

I just made the update. I've been using Illustrator for about 6 years, and I never knew that. To avoid confusion, that to me seems more like 'clipping' than their other feature, 'clipping mask.' The clipping mask in Illustrator seems more like a cropping mask.

Thank you very much for your kind words. I'm glad that comics and animation are your two favorite fields too. Whether I succeed in my current goal, it will certainly be an adventure.

Really? Can you explain how? I understand, and I hope this list doesn't cause controversy for that reason. The crew of every program has different intentions in what they are trying to sell. Some overthrow everything, some keep it simple, and some only use the essentials. This list isn't comparing which one is the best of all time; it is comparing which works best for the user. After all, every designer benefits differently. But just to be clear, I prefer Designer. :D Right, but I think Paolo was saying that feature was in Designer, so I was trying to be more clear in what I was getting at.

Hello everyone, there has been a major update to the original post and title.

I find Affinity Photo overwhelming because of the multiple personas. Compared to Designer, the three listed for me make total sense. However, I wouldn't say Photo is a ripoff. As MattP said earlier, the UI was designed entirely their own way. To fit the most important panels in one workspace, the program would have to look similar. There are many programs 'similar' to Photoshop, but they have different initiatives.To answer your question, Affinity is for an easier way of working. In Designer for example, I only need to dig through the menus for one option, and that is expanding strokes. That's it. Everything else is right there on the work space in an organized layout. Plus, a lot of the tools are so much less delicate.

By that first feature, I mean making "flood" fills entirely by overlapping regions. Applying a regular fill on an open path will just create the fill from the beginning point to its end point.

Sounds very impressive. And that is my plan. Now that I have the graphic skills, and now that I am finally happy with the program I am using (after years of kicking myself), I'm attempting to make a comic to later publish and sell on a website like Blurb or Lulu and see how progress goes with that. It's aimed for kids, and the kids I work with already think I'm awesome. Haha. All it really takes is the simple "Get out there and do it" approach. I hear you. I went through a phase when I was trying to get back to regular pixel drawing, but I am just too use to vector. It is convenient in so many ways.

I was thinking it would be a good idea to add Corel to the list, but I am working on more comparisons to add to this topic, and I really don't know much about Corel. Would you be up to backing me up if I add it?

That is true. There are many times I copied text online and accidentally copied other content like bars, tables, and bullets, and the pasted results were not the same.

SrPx, I find what you said in your third paragraph pretty neat in regards to the software you use for creating cartoons. In today's world, vector is the most crucial methods for modern cartoons. However, being a lover of the classics, I always think it's worth while experimenting. Someone I'm talking to on DeviantArt wants to create cartoons the traditional style (not saying that's what you're doing since I really don't know), and she too uses a lot of pixel tools. My point is, I envy you for going for your own style. I get that the market is very competitive, and what ever is fastest sells, though I do miss the traditional style. Reading this and then reading what my friend said, I wonder if it is slowly coming back. We're probably getting a little off topic, but I'll just say this. I really like Designer for my work because of it having both pixel and vector tools. It is a great way to mimic traditional animation in a completely new approach. For the classic style, everything started out as pencil sketches and paper. For Designer, I can create realistic looking sketches without having to worry about the cost of paper and tools (that was a pretty big issue in the past). After all the sketches are done, I can use the vector tools to ink over them. Maybe even use gradients. It would take longer to animate, but that is the style I'm thinking to shooting for. It is practically the same style as in the past but on software.