Jump to content

fde101

Members
  • Content count

    2,450
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by fde101

  1. Another thought on the grid idea is that there is almost no downside to building it up incrementally. Consider: PHASE 1 (initial implementation of feature) Always uses the bounding box of the selected object/layer Two new menu items Create Grid from Selected Object... This item pops up a box asking how many grid lines should be added in between the ones that connect to the bounding box. Upon accepting the entry, the box closes and the grid is set to match, made visible, with snapping to the grid enabled. Create Grid from Selected Object using Previous Settings This item does the same thing, but does not pop up the box asking how many lines to use, instead using the value from the last time the first item was selected. Shortcut keys can be assigned to the menu items. Whether or not there should be default shortcut keys for this is an open question. PHASE 2 (enhancing the functionality from phase 1) One new menu item, which is a toggled setting: Automatically Update Grid when Selection Changes When this is turned on, any time a selection is made, the grid is automatically updated to match the bounding box of the selection. No shortcut key by default, but one can be added by the user if desired. Disabled by default (for obvious reasons). Add a checkbox to the box that pops up when selecting the "Create Grid from Selected Object..." menu item, which reflects the state of the new menu item, for convenience. Checking this box enables the menu item, unchecking it disables it. PHASE 3 If a shape is selected which has parallel sides that are at an angle, match the slope of the grid to those sides. Adjust the produced grid to account for isometric settings. Add a "Base grid on bounding box, ignoring shape" checkbox to the "Create Grid from Selected Object..." box, turned off by default. This too should be carried over to the other (by now existing) menu items. PHASE 4 Examine the shapes to find the long part of the edge. If there is a straight (could be diagonal) side to the shape but with a part that sticks out (or in), line up the grid with the part of the shape that is longest (ignoring the small circular part that sticks out from a puzzle piece for example). This too would be disabled by the "Base grid on bounding box, ignoring shape" checkbox from phase 3. etc.
  2. From a pure usability standpoint, I agree with this completely. The issue at hand is the hesitation on the part of @Ben and thus likely the other Serif developers to devote the time into developing the "ghost" functionality that would be required for the more "discoverable" solution to become a possibility. The main reason I proposed the grid solution is that it exists now. The visibility of the grid, the ability to configure the spacing of the grid, the snapping to the grid, is all existing functionality. What would be added is basically a shortcut to very quickly configure the existing functionality, and I would expect that could be developed with minimal effort, with no changes to the core feature set of the software. With a sufficiently complete scripting interface we could probably script this solution with minimal effort. The question is if you want the "ghost" feature to go onto a waiting list with a zillion other great ideas that are competing with each other for development time, or have something that can be rapidly developed with little risk to the other features and we might be able to get it much sooner? There is no rule that they could not provide the grid feature quickly then decide to go back and implement the "ghost" feature as well at some point in the future when time permits, but if this can cover a significant portion of the use cases and we can have it that much sooner... (And apologies that I'm sure I went over 100 words with this one myself )
  3. My "grid from object" suggestion could account for this if it were expanded to bisect the generated grid. If you were creating a grid from a square with 10mm per side, you would create a grid with 5mm spacing, offset to align to the sides of the square, and simply snap to the grid line. An option could be provided to determine how many grid lines should be spaced within the object (1 for 5mm grid, 2 for 10/3mm grid, etc...) with one command to specify the spacing and another to reuse the previous specification.
  4. Here are a few other sources indicating that "prevarication" implies a lie/deception: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/prevarication https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/prevarication https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prevaricate I did come across another site which gave both "american" and "british" definitions of the word, but they were both the same, and carried this same implication. So are the rest of us... As to the comment about construction projects having estimates for when they will be completed... they also have fixed scope. They know what they are building when they start and can reasonably estimate when it will be complete. These software projects do not have a fixed scope: Serif is responding to requests from users by implementing features and capabilities that were not part of the original plan. The scope of the project is constantly changing, and it is impossible to estimate how long something will take when you don't know what that something is. Sure, to estimate any one feature should theoretically be possible if you know that feature is going to be the priority and all resources can be dedicated to doing that, but with different people having different "pet" requirements (such as this one) and the need to prioritize what is being worked on, different developers likely juggling multiple tasks, trying to fix bugs in addition to adding the new features, etc., the juggling act does not allow for the same kind of estimating that you might expect from a contractor working on a building project - and even they don't always meet the goals they set. Serif may very well have estimates internally on how long things will take, but as soon as they share that estimate some vital bug may be discovered or a shift in priorities may happen, and the work may be preempted in favor of something they consider to be more important. If the original work was depending on something else and that something else similarly got preempted, the effect can trickle down to many things. Still you will wind up with people complaining that they said feature X would be done five months ago... it is quite understandable that they would keep their estimates to themselves.
  5. It might be incredible, but it is also incredibly unlikely. Serif has commented several times on the numerous threads that have been started on this subject that they have no plans to introduce animation features to the Affinity lineup.
  6. I looked it up in the dictionary. If you mean something else by it, then what dictionary can I find that in - or can you provide your definition? EDIT: now that the definition was added - that does differ from the definitions I am finding for that word. All of the other sources I am finding indicate that the word implies deception. I doubt I will be the only reader who has not seen that word before, so others would be likely to draw that same conclusion if faced with that same word and trying to look it up. I still don't think that this word fits what Serif is doing, but at least the connotations don't seem to be there that I was reading into it, so for that I'll meet you half way - no project of any complexity wants to commit to a date for having something done. That would be foolish. They are not being evasive, simply realistic. Also, this is not an "open" project no matter how much the openness of the forum might suggest - this is a commercial endeavor, so there will be some things that they necessarily need to keep a lid on until they are ready to roll them out.
  7. This is a rather unusual word. I've never seen it before this thread. I tried looking it up and the definition basically means "lie" or "deception by skirting around the details" - there is no deception here, no lying going on. Yes, details are being omitted, but in order to avoid deceiving people. I think you might want to reconsider this word choice. This thread has degraded into a great example of why Serif does not normally comment on feature requests. I don't blame them.
  8. Resolve has been Linux-based for a long time because of their big 5-figure price tag control surface. The fact that they have now separated the control surface from the Linux software version is not nearly as big of a change as updating something that doesn't already run on Linux to now do so. Also, I would estimate that Linux is dwarfed compared to the other two major platforms among the customer base Serif is shooting for, compared to a smaller overall market base for a program like Resolve, where the proportional installed base for Linux is almost certainly going to be much more strongly represented. I don't disagree that it would be nice to have a Linux version of the Affinity products available, but I don't believe Resolve represents a useful comparison.
  9. You can do this when the Fill tool is selected, using the options in the context toolbar.
  10. errno 22 is EINVAL, and for flock it is documented to return that in errono if attempting to lock something that is not a file. File locking on a network share can be problematic as even with a common protocol different implementations can behave differently under various conditions, particularly when mixing protocols (though I don't think that is the case here) or connecting a client on one platform to a server on a different platform.
  11. If there is a legitimate use case that would be covered by a grid, an equally sensible feature might be to have a command to generate a grid based on a selected object. In other words, select an object, execute that command, and a grid is automatically produced such that the lines of the object is pre-snapped to the lines of the grid.
  12. This may be difficult sometimes if trying to create a regular pattern of irregularly shaped objects that still happen to fit together... puzzle pieces perhaps? I'm not sure how that relates to this request, however, as in creating something like this you would be snapping similar objects to each other, rather than to themselves.
  13. Those are not apps, and there are already app stores for all three platforms that the Affinity products are released on and it is available on those app stores. There is no reason that starter documents could not be shared on the forum if anyone is interested in doing that. If there is enough interest perhaps Serif would consider making a separate section of the forum dedicated to the sharing of user-created resources such as starter documents, templates (if/when this gets implemented), assets and the like? In fact... they already have: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/11-resources/
  14. I've seen this as well and I believe it is intentional. Photo is optimized for working on raster images in which there is typically a "background" pixel layer. As the output format of such a document will generally be a raster image as well, I suspect the vector objects are being rendered to match the underlying resolution of the document as this is a truer reflection of the state of what is hypothetically a raster document.
  15. No, it tries to give the illusion of doing that... if it actually did that it would be a performance nightmare. It tries to save frequently, but not with every character typed. Even so some apps are still impacted enough that disabling the feature improves their performance. The underpinnings are described here: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/DataManagement/Conceptual/DocBasedAppProgrammingGuideForOSX/StandardBehaviors/StandardBehaviors.html
  16. It's the hamburger menu in the corner of the panel (four lines with a triangle at the bottom).
  17. @JGD, please note that each of your posts has WAY over 100 words in it.
  18. I've been using Macs since the whole "auto-save" thing was a thing - it still isn't. It's an illusion presented by some minor changes in wording and a decision to have software save over your files without asking. There are pros and cons to that, but one of the cons is that it lulls people into a false sense of security that they don't need to save periodically as they assume the OS is doing it for them (sometimes it does, sometimes it does not), then if the power goes out or an app crashes at an inopportune time they lose that much more of their work. Macs are still better than the alternatives, but this particular change is a misfeature and should not have been made.
  19. fde101

    Data merge

    This is not up for a vote. +1 doesn't help. They already said it is coming.
  20. Instead of that, consider adding Publisher to your roster. Publisher can do these things, and if you have both Publisher and Designer, you can access most of Designer's functionality from within Publisher while creating a document.
  21. Yep, that is exactly what inline does. If you need the flexibility of the other options, I don't think there is much you can do to have this work "automatically" the way you seem to be hoping for. I could be mistaken as well and others might chime in with suggestions, but I suspect you will just need to check it after major changes and be prepared for a few manual tweaks when things jump boundaries like that.
  22. The CDR file format specifications are evidently not available anywhere, but it may be possible for Serif to gain access to CMX file format specifications from Corel?
  23. fde101

    Panels vs menu bar

    Sure, I'd rather the various other apps I've used that have similar issues also worked in a manner that promoted greater sanity, but I've seen various issues with other apps too that this one has helped me out of. It's a useful tool to have on hand.
  24. fde101

    Panels vs menu bar

    I find Spectacle to be very useful in situations like that: https://www.spectacleapp.com/
  25. It might be less then undesirable to consider giving users of modifier-deficient systems the option to have the left and right alt keys behave like separate modifier keys? (Or left and right control or shift for that matter)?
×

Important Information

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.