JET_Affinity

Especially when trying to develop something innovative as opposed to just more "me, too; same ol' same ol'",  solid foundations have to be laid for what users consider "basic things." I have plenty of "me, too" programs. I don't need another one.
If all I were seeing in Affinity were just another "me, too" approach, I'd just yawn.
Who's not "letting" you?
Fact is, B13eL's post that started this thread was just a useless, unproductive rant. It doesn't even mention any capabilities he's (she's?) so upset about.
And your "fanboy" nonsense is just a childish insult to fellow users who don't agree with you.
No one "prevented" either. And no one is prevented from disagreeing with them.
Resorting to ad hominem insult is a dead giveaway of weak argument; and a sure way to lose respect.
JET

Especially when trying to develop something innovative as opposed to just more "me, too; same ol' same ol'",  solid foundations have to be laid for what users consider "basic things." I have plenty of "me, too" programs. I don't need another one.
If all I were seeing in Affinity were just another "me, too" approach, I'd just yawn.
Who's not "letting" you?
Fact is, B13eL's post that started this thread was just a useless, unproductive rant. It doesn't even mention any capabilities he's (she's?) so upset about.
And your "fanboy" nonsense is just a childish insult to fellow users who don't agree with you.
No one "prevented" either. And no one is prevented from disagreeing with them.
Resorting to ad hominem insult is a dead giveaway of weak argument; and a sure way to lose respect.
JET

Same as everyone else fanboy, scroll to the bottom of the store homepage and pick a size
https://affinity.serif.com/store/

Pivotal? Hardly. There a several third party autotrace applications available, which work fairly good. Copying/importing those results to AD is easy.

and trace by hand. Autotrace is just a gimmick  :rolleyes:

We already have a full tracing engine that we used within the more recent drawPlus versions - it's actually pretty good, but there are a few flaws that actually add up to being enough of a problem that we were unhappy to include it at present. We'd rather include no tracing functionality at all until we have something we can be proud of - it's just the way that we like to work :) If we weren't happy, then within a few hours you'd see why and then you'd be unhappy too - and that's not what anybody wants...

Exactly. And that's the misconception that is so pervasive nowadays; that isometric drawing is nothing more than just distorting a plan view into "30° angles" and extruding it into blocky shapes.
I blame that largely on two things:
The misappropriation of the "isometric" term by those creating old-style aliased computer game artwork using a 1:2 rise-to-run pixel grid (which is neither isometric nor dimetric; it's just an arbitrary oblique). The nearly complete absence of features in the vast majority of mainstream vector-based drawing programs expressly supporting axonometric drawing, ever since the advent of the "desktop revolution" in the mid-80s. The latter is an ironic and tragic pity, because:
Axonometric drawing is, by definition, a 2D drawing discipline; and one every bit as venerable as the 2D converging "vanishing point" perspective still universally taught in common art classes. Axonometric drawing is applicable to all styles of commercial illustration. It is not just apropos to the purview of mechanical engineering departments. 2D axonometric drawing is no more "obsoleted" by 3D CAD than  2D "vanishing point perspective" is "obsoleted" by 3D artwork modeling programs. Mainstream Bezier-based drawing programs are 2D drawing programs used for all kinds of commercial illustration. Mainstream Bezier-based drawing programs do, in fact, provide the geometry necessary for axonometric drawing; their interface design just tends to hide it. The result is three and a half decades of neglect of one of the most important 2D drawing disciplines by most of the largest vendors of ostensibly "wide based" commercial illustration software. That's three and a half decades of software advancement and users' potential for skill-broadening fun and profit already lost.
JET
 

While smart icon generator seems "smart" all it appears to do is extrude a 2D image through an isometric plane, and replicate the edge pixels on the other faces.  It's an illusion, more than real isometric.
 

The world of them against us and ‘I want it “right now!!!!” has come to this forum.  
Sometimes one needs to step away from this place to take a breath. 
Here is the good news for all you complainers that want to move away to somewhere else; 
I hear that a certain competitor is doubling their subscription fees, 
and other developers are quickly moving away from subscriptions and lowering their software prices because they are chasing serif. 
To Ben and the dev, please keep “twiddling’ those thumbs.

And anonymous childishly insulting forum participants will be insulting.
I never made apologies for being a fan of things worthy before "fanboy" became a cliché internet insult, and I still don't. So for the record:
I'm an unashamed, outspoken, T-shirt wearing "fanboy" of KTM motorcycles because they're great motorcycles. That neither means I don't have my pet peeves about them, nor that I don't wish KTM would hurry up and develop what I know would be a "perfect" bike. I'm an unashamed, outspoken "fanboy" of Serif for what it's doing in plain sight with the Affinity line. That neither means I don't wish it would do some things in ways I know would be better, nor that I wouldn't love to have it all done today. The accusation of this thread was that Serif is "not developing the product." I make no apology for calling that utter nonsense. The proof is openly visible to anyone who actually bothers to investigate the progress before posting rants and insults.
By the way, Affinity Dev Team, where do I get the T-shirt?  (Take all the time you need. You know; 10...15 minutes.)
JET

I'll second Aammppaa's response. If you actually think nothing is happening toward development of the Affinity applications, you need look no further than the Beta processes that are openly shared on this very site.
This is a different world from old-school beta development programs of many monolithic software companies, in which only a select few users were privileged to know what is going on after signing a non-disclosure agreement.
Go to the beta sub-forums. See the things being worked on, tested by users, and refined before release. The particular "must have" feature you have in mind may be being worked on. If not, that's what the Feature Requests sub-forum is for. Search there and find a discussion on it. The developers do review feature requests. That's where many things being developed come from.
JET

And anonymous childishly insulting forum participants will be insulting.
I never made apologies for being a fan of things worthy before "fanboy" became a cliché internet insult, and I still don't. So for the record:
I'm an unashamed, outspoken, T-shirt wearing "fanboy" of KTM motorcycles because they're great motorcycles. That neither means I don't have my pet peeves about them, nor that I don't wish KTM would hurry up and develop what I know would be a "perfect" bike. I'm an unashamed, outspoken "fanboy" of Serif for what it's doing in plain sight with the Affinity line. That neither means I don't wish it would do some things in ways I know would be better, nor that I wouldn't love to have it all done today. The accusation of this thread was that Serif is "not developing the product." I make no apology for calling that utter nonsense. The proof is openly visible to anyone who actually bothers to investigate the progress before posting rants and insults.
By the way, Affinity Dev Team, where do I get the T-shirt?  (Take all the time you need. You know; 10...15 minutes.)
JET

And anonymous childishly insulting forum participants will be insulting.
I never made apologies for being a fan of things worthy before "fanboy" became a cliché internet insult, and I still don't. So for the record:
I'm an unashamed, outspoken, T-shirt wearing "fanboy" of KTM motorcycles because they're great motorcycles. That neither means I don't have my pet peeves about them, nor that I don't wish KTM would hurry up and develop what I know would be a "perfect" bike. I'm an unashamed, outspoken "fanboy" of Serif for what it's doing in plain sight with the Affinity line. That neither means I don't wish it would do some things in ways I know would be better, nor that I wouldn't love to have it all done today. The accusation of this thread was that Serif is "not developing the product." I make no apology for calling that utter nonsense. The proof is openly visible to anyone who actually bothers to investigate the progress before posting rants and insults.
By the way, Affinity Dev Team, where do I get the T-shirt?  (Take all the time you need. You know; 10...15 minutes.)
JET

And anonymous childishly insulting forum participants will be insulting.
I never made apologies for being a fan of things worthy before "fanboy" became a cliché internet insult, and I still don't. So for the record:
I'm an unashamed, outspoken, T-shirt wearing "fanboy" of KTM motorcycles because they're great motorcycles. That neither means I don't have my pet peeves about them, nor that I don't wish KTM would hurry up and develop what I know would be a "perfect" bike. I'm an unashamed, outspoken "fanboy" of Serif for what it's doing in plain sight with the Affinity line. That neither means I don't wish it would do some things in ways I know would be better, nor that I wouldn't love to have it all done today. The accusation of this thread was that Serif is "not developing the product." I make no apology for calling that utter nonsense. The proof is openly visible to anyone who actually bothers to investigate the progress before posting rants and insults.
By the way, Affinity Dev Team, where do I get the T-shirt?  (Take all the time you need. You know; 10...15 minutes.)
JET

And anonymous childishly insulting forum participants will be insulting.
I never made apologies for being a fan of things worthy before "fanboy" became a cliché internet insult, and I still don't. So for the record:
I'm an unashamed, outspoken, T-shirt wearing "fanboy" of KTM motorcycles because they're great motorcycles. That neither means I don't have my pet peeves about them, nor that I don't wish KTM would hurry up and develop what I know would be a "perfect" bike. I'm an unashamed, outspoken "fanboy" of Serif for what it's doing in plain sight with the Affinity line. That neither means I don't wish it would do some things in ways I know would be better, nor that I wouldn't love to have it all done today. The accusation of this thread was that Serif is "not developing the product." I make no apology for calling that utter nonsense. The proof is openly visible to anyone who actually bothers to investigate the progress before posting rants and insults.
By the way, Affinity Dev Team, where do I get the T-shirt?  (Take all the time you need. You know; 10...15 minutes.)
JET

And anonymous childishly insulting forum participants will be insulting.
I never made apologies for being a fan of things worthy before "fanboy" became a cliché internet insult, and I still don't. So for the record:
I'm an unashamed, outspoken, T-shirt wearing "fanboy" of KTM motorcycles because they're great motorcycles. That neither means I don't have my pet peeves about them, nor that I don't wish KTM would hurry up and develop what I know would be a "perfect" bike. I'm an unashamed, outspoken "fanboy" of Serif for what it's doing in plain sight with the Affinity line. That neither means I don't wish it would do some things in ways I know would be better, nor that I wouldn't love to have it all done today. The accusation of this thread was that Serif is "not developing the product." I make no apology for calling that utter nonsense. The proof is openly visible to anyone who actually bothers to investigate the progress before posting rants and insults.
By the way, Affinity Dev Team, where do I get the T-shirt?  (Take all the time you need. You know; 10...15 minutes.)
JET

Yeah, you nod off so often, I can hear you snoring from all the way across the pond.
JET

Yeah, you nod off so often, I can hear you snoring from all the way across the pond.
JET

Yeah, you nod off so often, I can hear you snoring from all the way across the pond.
JET

I'll second Aammppaa's response. If you actually think nothing is happening toward development of the Affinity applications, you need look no further than the Beta processes that are openly shared on this very site.
This is a different world from old-school beta development programs of many monolithic software companies, in which only a select few users were privileged to know what is going on after signing a non-disclosure agreement.
Go to the beta sub-forums. See the things being worked on, tested by users, and refined before release. The particular "must have" feature you have in mind may be being worked on. If not, that's what the Feature Requests sub-forum is for. Search there and find a discussion on it. The developers do review feature requests. That's where many things being developed come from.
JET

The kind of "extrude" tools depicted in maxmax's post are not 3D modeling tools. They are straightforward 2D drawing tools.
However, nor are the specific examples shown "isometric," because the original squares to which they have been applied are drawn "in-the-flat." In any axonometric orientation (of which isometric is just a special case), if the face of the extrusion were viewed "straight on", no perpendicular extrusion of that face would be visible. So those two screenshots are just arbitrary obliques.
Those extrude tools can be used to help draw objects in an isometric (or other axonometric) orientation, but to do so you would first draw the shape being extruded as if it were already parallel to one of the iso planes. In other words, you would have to do other transformations and calculations in order to correctly call the result "isometric."
Affinity Designer does not as yet have such an "extrusion tool." But constructing such an extrusion is fairly trivial. Just draw any shape on one of the iso grid planes, duplicate it, move it along the perpendicular axis the correctly proportional distance, use the Pen Tool in Line Mode to draw the  edges of the extrusion, and delete the "hidden" edges.
I quite agree that an Extrude Tool would reduce that tedium. But as always, I don't want to see Affinity merely mimic the functionally trite tools of other programs. I already have those programs. I'm frankly tired of the same old kindergarten stuff. I want to see innovatively better implementations. In this specific context, what I would envision is an enhancement to Affinity's Shape Tools.
First, a little explanation: Consider that most familiar example of an "isometric" cube. The reason why the perimeter of that cube forms a hexagon is simple 2D geometry. The cube is drawn as if oriented such that the diagonal between its nearest and farthest corners is parallel to your line-of-sight. Therefore, each side of the cube makes the same angle with your line-of sight. That angle is the specific angle imprinted on every isometric drawing template: 35°16" (thirty-five degrees, sixteen minutes). Each of the three visible sides of the cube are foreshortened (scaled in one direction) by the sine of that angle. Each of the visible edges of the cube are foreshortened by the cosine of that same angle. That simple "sine and cosine" proportional principle applies not just to isometric, but to any orientation in any axonometric drawing method.
The existing Shapes palette already provides a plethora of common shapes, each with special handles by which to adjust their own appropriate parameters. Corresponding numeric input fields also appear in the Control Bar for numerically specifying those parameters.
Now imagine this: Suppose all of the Shape Tools simply had two additional parameters, labeled "Tilt" and "Extrude."
So, for example, you use the Cog Shape Tool to draw a cog. You adjust its various parameters (inner and outer radius, number of teeth, etc.) It works as it always has for drawing a "cog" viewed "straight on." But now, in the Control Bar are the two added parameter fields. Entering an angle (or expression that yields an angle) into the Tilt field scales the shape vertically by the sine of that angle. Entering a length (or expression) into the Extrude field offsets a copy of that scaled shape and moves it vertically by the value entered multiplied by the cosine of the Tilt angle, and draws the connecting "extrusion" lines between the two. In other words, it does the same thing as those ordinary "extrude" tools in other programs, but does it in correct geometric proportion for any 3D orientation. And it does it in concert with the power of all the already existing shape-specific adjustable parameters of the Shape Tools.
That's an example of adding functional elegance to a program in which a small addition compounds the functional power of existing features. That would blow the doors off any 2D Extrude Tool in any of the existing mainstream 2D drawing programs.
Now imagine further that, over time, other Shape Tools were added. With the Tilt and Extrude parameters in place, imagine a Spiral Shape Tool which didn't simply "extrude" the shape along the Extrude value, but repeated the shape along the extrusion length. That could equate to a more powerful and more versatile drawing tool than the tool in Corel Technical Designer for drawing threads and threaded holes. It would be far more intuitive and less tedious than the little-known technique of using Illustrator's under-appreciated Reshape Tool for the same purposes.
Imagine further that, over time, functionality were provided for something called a Shape Group; a means by which to combine two Shape Tools which could share given parameters. A Hex Bolt Shape Group would include an instance of the Hexagon Shape Tool and an instance of the Spiral Shape Tool, and the result would be the ability to instantly create correctly-proportioned hex bolts of any diameter, head size, and length—at any visual orientation.
JET

I see no reason why it wouldn't / couldn't be. If an axonometric grid is active when the Shape Tool is employed, the grid plane would correspond to the Tilt value and the perpendicular planes would correspond to the scale factor for the Extrude value.
JET

Have you been trying the 1.7 Betas?
They have been released frequently for many months now and introduce many new features.

I’d love to see this. It’s similar to the problem of not being able to set ‘power duplicate’ scaling to use absolute values instead of percentages (e.g. to draw a set of concentric circles where the diameter of each one is 2mm greater than the previous one).

Not to engage in playground bravado, but I've been making my living full-time with graphics software (primarily mainstream vector drawing programs) since its early days in the mid-80s.
I may be drawing a freeform irregular shape surrounding or in relation to other objects for any of countless reasons. I may be drawing a "background" shape which I intend to send to the rear of a collection of other paths and apply a fill  to it after. I may be simply drawing a path that I will compound with a pre-existing path in order to make a hole in it. I may be drawing a path to use  as a clipping path. I may be drawing a path to use in a Boolean punch operation. I may be drawing a cut line for a vinyl cutter. I may be drawing in outline mode. I may be drawing a temporary construction path.
OR, I may have simply switched to the Pencil tool to scribble out a path for any reason whatsoever, when the current stroke and fill just happens to be set to none or white. I still expect the tool to behave the same, by previewing the expected bitmap breadcrumb trail as I drag it. I can apply a stroke to it after mouseup, if I want to. It would be rather annoying for the program to "slap my hand" by simply refusing to preview the path I'm scribing, just because I haven't applied a stroke yet.
Take a look at the corresponding tools in any of the mainstream drawing programs, Gerry. Let me put it to you this way: What is it going to hurt for the Pencil's interface to simply behave consistently, regardless of the current stroke and fill settings?
I rather expect this "invisible drawing" behavior is just a bug, not a "feature."
JET