Bri-Toon

You know, I had an issue with this for 1.7, so I backed everything up this time around, but it appears I didn't have to do that. 1.8 transferred everything over without the need of me having to reimport everything. I don't know what went differently. I can't guarantee the same for others though.

You bring up a really good point. Currently, I don't think there is any way to work around this. It would be a good idea for the team to implement a horizontal list of layer thumbnails of the selected layers to show on the top of the Layer Effects window. Then there is a "Turn off/on" button for each and a "Turn off/on" for all. But no matter what is checked off, the effects below the thumbnails will still be checked on as a way to keep track of its effect history. Right now, there is really no way of remembering.

Sorry for the late reply. To turn them back on, you do the same thing you did to turn them off as long as you don't close the document or anything. For me, I still have the same settings when I turn them back on. Do you not?

I caught a little trick. If you click on just a single FX icon (on a layer) first so the Layer Effects window pops up, you can then shift click the remaining layers, and then turn off all effects at once. Or, you can shift click all the layers first, and then click on the FX icon (below the layers), and turn off all the effects at once. If there is a layer that has a different effect than another and is not showing up in the Layer Effects window because of multiple layers being selected, then you need to turn on the effect that normally would be on, and then turn it back off to rest the layer.

Congratulations, team! I kind of expected this, but it's still rewarding, ain't it?

And that is possibly the best solution. I just wasn't sure if that page mentioned something we didn't know about yet.

Hi guys, so it looks like this operation can be done after all, but I think I caught a bug (unless I'm missing something.) On this page, there is a section that says, "Moving and transforming a selection only." It looks like the method that is supposed to work is by toggling a quick mask, but when using the Move Tool, it is the mask that gets moved; not the selection. Am I reading this correctly? It says that it will move the selection. https://affinity.help/photo/en-US.lproj/index.html?page=pages/Selections/selections_transform.html?title=Moving and transforming pixel selections

Additionally, there is also an app in the Mac App Store called File Icon Changer. When I updated to Mojavi, there was a bug in which changing icons in your approach would be too pixelated. I change the icons for folders and everything. In order for the icons to have their actual look, they now need to be completely square (all four sides the same dimension). File Icon Changer can change the icon despite the file's dimensions. Just in case you're interested. So I see that I didn't really give my say on this topic. Well I am a big fan of variety, and Affinity is a great example. Rather than doing things the same way as other competitors, they bridge for difference. And to me, it is why I love their software so much. It is more comfortable to use, it is more reliable, it is more attractive, and I have to say that I love how they do things their own way. So to me, I am not a fan of the new icons. They're not terrible, but it seems like it's an indication of matching the modern world, whereas the older ones were an indication of saying, "We stand out." And I don't mean for this to sound minimizing, because competing with the modern world is standard. I guess what I'm saying is that everyone has different ways of expressing themselves, and there is not one methods that fits all. That is why I believe in variety. So I find the way Affinity expresses themselves very appealing, and I wish there were more companies that did the same. I hope Affinity continues to do what seems right to them and not feel obligated to match the rest of the world. That is my opinion.

Thank you. This is the same for Photo.

The buttons on the main toolbar are pretty cramped together, so I'm trying to spread them out. But to make things easier, in the Customize Toolbar window, I clicked and dragged the default toolbar to get the default look, but it doesn't look like it reset as it was supposed to. A lot of the buttons now are cramped to the right. Is this supposed to happen? Weird.mp4

I personally like the Magic Wand better as well. When I use the Selection Brush Tool, I seem to go off the boundaries quite a lot. Depending on how solid the lines of the draft are, it is very hard for that to happen with the Magic Wand. And who knows, maybe the tool is planned since it's in the iPad version.

The button should still be available. The selection would just close automatically with a straight line from the two endpoints.

Thank you Firstdefense. I think this is probably the best alternative. Well that's odd. I'm glad you caught that. I'm gonna be reviewing all of the designs for mistakes like these before releasing anything.

Thank you for the replies. And yes, I realized I made an error by adding an E in the word, “crowd.” The correction is in the Affinity file. And I want to say that I do remember testing the posterize adjustment, but the main thing I am trying to recollect is how to get the difference of the skin tone. The original difference of the skin color between the two boys was barely noticeable whereas that one setting blew it up. If you compare the example image with the Affinity file, there is a huge difference in the skin tone.

Hi there, I'm working on different designs for T-shirts in Affinity Designer, and as I was exporting my different forms, I guess I forgot to re-save changes to my Affinity file. I've been going through all the different adjustment layers trying remember what I had previously done, but I don't remember and have given up after trying to figure it out for an hour. Can anyone please help me? Here is the file (Form 2) Skater Kids Product.afdesign And this is the variation I am trying to replicate.

First of all, welcome to the Affinity forum! I can see why this would be confusing for newcomers. I don't think too many new users would think to use the Pixel Tool as an eraser. I mean I can't compare to most, but I have to agree that this would be confusing. I mean a lot of key commands are shortcuts for other tools, whereas the Pixel Tool's erase mode is on its own. Or even a pixel mode for the Eraser Tool.

Oh they are definitely aware of it, though I think it has more to do with the approach to bring in a new feature. They have mentioned how the Flood Tool in DrawPlus did not work the way they wanted it to because of the gap space it created. So I guess it has to do with implementing a tool right before they release it.

Oh nice! I didn't realize it has been updated already.

Looking back at the old Plus range icons (particular versions), I think I can see where Affinity is going with this. Both the shape and design are almost identical. Also, it's interesting seeing how the newer concepts are based off of the old.

Thanks. Yeah I love it because there are so many variations of it.

Sorry. I probably went through that too fast. Bring that shape just to the right of the photo layer's "thumbnail." There will be a vertical blue bar indicating where to place it.

Not a problem. Here is a recording explaining it better, but it's what ever approach works for you. Recording.mp4

Glicky, it's been forever since I used CorelDraw, and I am interested in a fill tool that works on shape intersections as well. So I ask, how would the flood fill affect intersections with strokes? Like in your third example, if you moved that middle object away after it was filled in, would the stroke then be part of that new fill?

Maybe you could make a mask around the photo with slight slants on the edges. After you do that, click on the mask icon (not the layer icon, but mask icon), and then go into the FX menu and add a gaussian blur.