Jump to content

JET_Affinity

Members
  • Content Count

    503
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JET_Affinity

  1. How many years has Illustrator been around? Are you unaware that up to at least CS6 (final version before Captive Customers licensing, which is when I flatly quit buying it) its 'professional' knife tool still doesn't know what to do with an open, unfilled path? Have you been active in the Affinity Beta testing? I know personally that new features are tweaked and improved as a result of feedback there. Unlike Adobe for its entire history during when I bought it, you had to sign NDAs to participate in beta programs. JET
  2. EXACTLY! If the vector-based drawing software segment is ever going to get out of its decades-long lethargy (due primarily to the market dominance of Illustrator), we should be thinking beyond the mediocre status-quo conventional-wisdom. Serif's Affinity project is a rare opportunity to start doing that, because it actually listens to user input on features not yet implemented in yet another look-same, act-same, "me, too" fashion in order to satisfy often very rudely presented repetitive 'demand' for more of the same old crap. I don't need more of the same old crap. A 'knif
  3. Some of you guys need to get off your 'I'm such a professional' high horse, effectively insulting everyone else here you don't even know. A professional can do professional work with a crayon. I'm inclined to doubt the claimed 'professionalism' of anyone who truly thinks a program is 'useless' until it's a veritable clone of the one program with which they're familiar, and has all the time in the world to waste repetitively whining about it. I've been making my living in digital graphics for 35 years. Can I right now, today, do commercial-quality saleable work for clients in Affinity? Abs
  4. Adding a fresh post is fine. Creating yet another thread on the same topic is not. That just wastes the time of all forum participants. As does creating these grab-bag 'personal lists' of feature requests that effectively negate the basic organizational schema of a discussion forum in the first place. JET
  5. Please search for existing topics. When you have new feature request topics, please create one thread per topic. No one has time to weed through each person's grab-bag list of pet features. Such threads just lead to the confusion of scattered and disjointed discussions. JET
  6. There are existing discussion threads for both of these topics. JET
  7. Otto, In a 2D vector environment, the kind of distortion you depict is essentially an envelope distortion. It's not "wishful thinking"; it's quite common, there are other feature request threads about it, the developers have acknowledged it and stated that it is planned. The fact that envelope distortion features are common in this software category does not make them all equal. It is a generic term, and implementations range from good to very poor. The interfaces of some are just a few lame handles that you use by 'eyeballing' the result; others are based on geometric principles of
  8. Two weeks! Everything you need will be done in two weeks. (See The Money Pit.) Seriously, no one can tell you 'when'. And there are already other threads about this. While we anticipate possible new features, our contribution should be well thought-out ideas about how the desired feature should work and perhaps how it could improve upon standard-fare. 'Perspective Tool' is vague because 'perspective' is a broadly generic term. Multiple treatments exist for 'perspective' drawing, some more geometrically valid than others. The most exciting 'new wrinkle' I've seen in the 'perspect
  9. Agree. It grieves me to see new features released in a sub-par state. It needs not only multiple contours, but control over spacing rate, either uniform or increasing / decreasing. (Think of surface contour lines on maps.) See CorelDraw's Contour Tool. It's been around so long and so many use it that that's going to be expected as minimum functionality by thousands. As a minimal workaround, there should at least be a keyboard shortcut one could tap to commit a contour while dragging the tool, so one could continue dragging for the next contour, commit it, and so on. JET
  10. To my mind, 'baking' the appearance of applied effects is an excellent term. Far more intuitively suggestive of the concept of committing to something than is 'expanding' it. What am I 'expanding' when I 'nail something down'? JET
  11. Bah. One guy's opinion. Don't worry. I won't be surprised. I also won't be surprised if it doesn't. If it does, I'll stop buying it, just as I did with Adobe, as soon as it made that announcement. If it doesn't, I'll continue updating my perpetual license. Simple as that. As it is, Corel is getting a significant portion of the money I no longer pay Adobe. JET
  12. Lest anyone be misled, this is not true. Corel offers both subscription and perpetual licensing; customer's choice. Corel should be commended (and supported) for not forcing a take-it-or-leave-it rental-only license scheme. I despise software rental schemes as much as anyone, and will not pay them. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater by spreading erroneous information. So far, Corel is still one of the 'good guys.' JET
  13. A simple "Select Inverse" command nested with the existing Select Previous and Select Next would work for that. It doesn't need to be associated with any 'Select Same..." feature. You could make as complicated a criteria-based selection as you want, and the Select Inverse command would work for that. Or, you could simply make any kind of selection you want having nothing to do with attributes (objects within a lasso selection, for example) and the Select Inverse command would work for that, too. In a nutshell, you guys are basically talking about what has been mentioned in the various rel
  14. I'm aware of that and quite agree. However, what got me here was clicking a Notification yesterday that responded to one of my posts. The subject caused me to assume I was in the feature request forum. This whole thread should have been moved. JET
  15. Especially given that Affinity does not provide transformation tools, but insists upon all routine tactile transforms being dependent upon bounding boxes, why not provide a bit of innovation to make the omnipresent and cluttering bounding boxes more useful? An illustrator should be able to perform tactile transformations in any direction desired, not just in the horizontal and vertical directions of the page, and not just in the direction of the bounding box's current or original orientation. Why can we reset the bounding box and rotate the Canvas, but cannot rotate the bounding box itse
  16. Fixx, Read the initial post in this thread. As I understand it, It's about pressuring Serif, not users, to license Astute Graphics's code in order to add it to Affinity's standard feature set, not necessarily as a plug-in. That is very specific. None of us on the user side knows how that kind of back-end deal between Serif and Astute Graphics would actually translate to us or our wallets or to the future development direction of Affinity. This is not the same thing as a general request for Serif to add a plug-in architecture to Affinity like those in other drawing programs, so as to
  17. I've made my living in graphics since 1972. In using graphics software ever since its advent in the mid-80s. Two things I've learned to avoid like the plague, and will not tolerate: Mission-critical dependency upon rented software. It's all for the vendor. What business wouldn't want to have its customers' work effectively held hostage by a continual rental payments scheme? Mission-critical dependency upon third-party plug-ins. To my mind, this pie-in-the-sky software model failed long ago. Users should counter the preached 'merits' of rented software licenses by pushing its cl
  18. That would seem obvious. But laboriously painting raster frames for an animated GIF is, well, laborious. But in a vector-based program with a blend capability, creating a sequence of frames is a simple matter of rasterizing the blend's steps. That can be done by simply taking a screenshot of a 'stretched out' blend and then cropping it into individual frames. But a command that simply rasterizes individual blend steps and exports them as a set of GIF frames eliminates that tedium. The advantage of starting with a vector blend is that it automates the tweening. So scaling, skewing, r
  19. Alfred is here for the same reason everyone is supposed to be here: to discuss a topic and it merits, not just vote yea or nay. And NOT to throw personal insults. JET
  20. I generally have some kinds of snaps turned on whenever I'm drawing. Snapping to nodes is probably the snapping behavior I most commonly need. So an explicit "Snap To Nodes" would certainly be more clearly-defined and intuitive than "Shape Key Points" or "Object Geometry." "Object Geometry" is pretty ambiguous. To my mind, important object geometry for snapping and alignment would include V and H extrema (and other tangents) of curved segments. JET
  21. If you have several objects overlapping, having Snap to Bounding Boxes turned on is of little use when you can't see the bounding box. For example, what am I snapping to here?: And by what logic does dragging a Guide out from a Ruler cause the current selection's bounding box to disappear, but doesn't cause other selection indicators to disappear?: And why don't Guides snap to nodes? JET
  22. Yep. If I turn that Prefs setting on, just scrolling (without modifier) zooms. But if it's off, I get the behavior I described. Affinity Designer 1.8.4.693; Windows 10. JET
  23. On Windows, with the Text Tool (or other tool) active, the scroll wheel of my mouse: With no modifier: scrolls vertically With Shift: scrolls horizontally With Ctrl: zooms All without invoking different tools. In Illustrator CS6, it's similar: No modifier: scrolls vertically With Shift: scrolls vertically in larger increments With Ctrl: scrolls horizontally With Alt: zooms The upshot is that you really can't expect all drawing programs to use exactly the same momentary keyboard modifiers. As you mentioned re Photoshop and Illustr
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.