fde101

This appears to be a possible duplicate of this existing (and very long) thread:

If you go back and review the purpose of his request, it was to reduce the "wasted" blank space in the panels by combining them in such a way that reduces the redundant features and crams things closer together so that they do not occupy as much space on the screen. Placing the existing panels side by side only serves to emphasize the "wasted" space so I don't think this is an answer to the perceived problem he was presenting.

You might be able to use expressions like "+=15" in the fields too but I don't have it in front of me to check right now. Many of the numeric fields in the Affinity products accept expressions like that.

If I am working on something using swatches, most of the time I will set up my swatches at the beginning, then just about the only thing I would use the Color panel for would be to adjust the Tint of a selected spot or global color, so for everything else it would be wasting space. If I am working on something using the Color panel significantly, chances are I am not using swatches. If anything I would like to see the Tint option added to the Swatches panel. There is enough room that if the Opacity control were slid up a bit it could fit underneath and work the same way without making the panel any larger. At least for my way of working, I don't think any other changes are needed here, and I think the rest of the division between the two panels is ideal.

To take this a step further, considering making it a symbol and having your "duplicate" layer being a symbol to which the levels adjustment is applied. That way if the original shape is modified the shadow will reflect those changes.

There were destructive modes available in the crop tool in the early 1.7 betas, but in 1.7.0.105 they were removed, with the comment "for now - will revisit":

Only when the target color falls precisely on a channel boundary.

@Pietje Bogerman, You can use the Offset Tool in the Layer Effects window (click on the "fx" along the bottom of the Layers panel) to do this, for both inner and outer shadows.

For whatever it probably isn't worth, I agree that this functionality could be presented more clearly in the UI. I think it could be done more simply, however: the "Use Baseline Grid" option in the Baseline Grid Manager could simply be renamed to "Override Baseline Grid", for example...

-3 There, it only took me one post to get ahead of your two :-)

This has come up numerous times in other threads. My understanding is that this is not practical on the app store version on the Mac due to sandboxing restrictions. It is most likely being omitted from the suite due to the inconsistency its implementation in the other versions would cause.

Could just add "(legacy)" after the name of the adjustment in the menus?

This is called pressing the button. You pressed it but have not released it. Clicking is pressing and immediately releasing the button.

Hi @tidbit, welcome to the forums! I would actually like to extend the subdivision request to include an option to subdivide along a linear axis in addition to the mode you are suggesting which accounts for the shape of the path. In other words, one option would subdivide based on the flattened path length, as your example shows, while another would divide evenly along the horizontal (or vertical) axis, wherever those points happen to fall along the length of the path, and another would subdivide evenly based on a straight line drawn between the two end points of the path. I think all of those options could be useful at times.

Actually, it gets stranger than that. I just did this in Designer since I happened to have it open, but I suspect Publisher would be the same? I had a simple rectangle with a global color assigned to it. I copied it and pasted it into a new document that has a different color profile assigned. In the new document, if I select that rectangle, the Color panel shows the "Global Color 1" assigned to the rectangle - but there is no document palette in the document, and thus no global colors. Somehow the rectangle is keeping the assignment of the global color across the copy, even though the global color doesn't exist in the target document. Based on that, I am forced to agree that there is definitely a bug here somewhere. As to the global color itself not being copied over to the new document, I would consider that a missing feature. However, if the object remains assigned to a color that does not exist in the new document, that is definitely a bug.

EDIT: I stand corrected from what I previously posted in this space. A global color swatch in the Affinity designer does in fact retain its values if you convert the color space of the document, and you can see the objects using the swatch shift colors accordingly within the document. Interesting... I'm not sure if I like that as a default behavior, but it seems to be what is being requested here...

I'm trying to picture this - how would you fold a 5-page spread? That being said, the need to provide printed and electronic copies of such a document is probably the most significant reason to prioritize this feature that has been presented so far. That is one thing that would be complicated by the use of guides to lay this out.

I agree that a studio panel for this would be nice. Adding controls for this to one of the menus and allowing keyboard shortcuts to be assigned would be nice also - at least a shortcut to open the box (an equivalent to the current toolbar button) but preferably a few to set some of the more common wrap options also.

You could continue using PagePlus for old projects and use Publisher for new ones. That is where a lot of others have ended up.

Yes, in most places, just use the mouse wheel - even faster than the arrow buttons - though I think they disabled that for one or two specific studio panels?

The Assign/Convert options are only for changing the color space of the document they are used in. I've never seen anything to suggest they would have any effect on copy/paste.

not when using Join Curve, but as others have pointed out, that is not the scenario that they are looking for here...

so don't use Join Curve... use the pen tool and click on each of the two nodes you are trying to join.

That depends on why the object is 100% K. If I were trying to match the color of an object to a color I found in an image and the color in the image happened to be 100% K, then my objective is to keep a specific color - the appearance of the color, not the numbers - and if I move to a document with a different profile, I need the color to be converted (translated) to continue to match the color from the picture. If I am trying to save cost/time by only using black ink (because color is more expensive or slower to print) then I would want the color to stay 100% K and not be converted. For this case I am willing to accept a slight variation in the appearance of the black. Currently, there is no mechanism to tell the Affinity apps which of these situations is the case for a particular use of 100% K whether in a swatch or otherwise, so it is assuming the first case I listed - that the color should be kept the same at the expense of the numeric values. I do think this is a reasonable default when the color is specified directly as a color value (CMYK or RGB). I continue to suggest that the solution is to create a special "K Only" swatch type, similar to the way spot colors work, which represents a 100% K value that does not get converted when moving the color between documents. This would handle the second case, which seems to be the one most of you are looking for. I do agree that option is currently missing and there is room for improvement, but I do *not* agree that the current behavior is a bug. It is needed to cover the first case I listed.

If the documents have the same color profile, it already works as is being requested. If you copy an object between documents the color is converted when the profile is different, in order to make sure it is the same actual color (or as closely as possible) in both documents - that makes sense, because with different profiles, different numbers are needed to achieve the same color in the end. I I am placing the same artwork on two different documents and they are being printed using two different profiles (media, etc.) then I probably want the artwork to look the same on both, but it won't unless the numbers are adjusted to compensate. If you change a document to a different profile, you have a choice of converting the colors (change the numbers to keep the colors the same) or of re-interpreting the colors (keeping the numbers the same and accepting that they will look different in the end). If you want to copy the objects to another document and it has a different profile and you are more concerned about the numbers than the appearance of the colors, change the color profile of the source document to match the target one and re-interpret rather than convert the colors. That way the profile and the numbers will match, and you can copy the object(s) over without the numbers changing.