fde101

Missed it by one minute - I just posted about the same thing 🙂
I hid mine to avoid having the duplicate.
Also noticed that the selection bounds around multiple selected objects do not expand to include the contour area which may be mildly confusing sometimes when trying to determine what is selected.

Serif doesn't often document the new features until closer to a stable release as they have a tendency to change quite a bit during the betas and too much of it would be wasted effort if done too soon.

Missed it by one minute - I just posted about the same thing 🙂
I hid mine to avoid having the duplicate.
Also noticed that the selection bounds around multiple selected objects do not expand to include the contour area which may be mildly confusing sometimes when trying to determine what is selected.

Great, another annoying popup to deal with...  sure they could do that (if they want to), but I like my idea better in this case.

I think you have zero clue about what kind of "work" I actually do. 😀
Suffice to say that "drawing" software has served me perfectly for the execution of more than 400 projects for satisfied clients in 44 different countries .
Its not like I am unfamiliar with CAD software, either. (It's just not the right tool for this particular kind of work...)

I'm worried that the channel editing is going to be expanded in convoluted, cumbersome and unintuitive ways.

True.  As it is implemented right now this should not be called a preset but perhaps a "configuration" or a "room".

True.  As it is implemented right now this should not be called a preset but perhaps a "configuration" or a "room".

Andy...
In response to your comment about Studio Presets – it would be extraordinarily confusing to have a preset update itself when a change is made. In my mind (and only mine, for now), what good is a preset if it is that fluid? To me, the whole idea of a preset is that I can come back to it at any time; in that scenario, it should be stable (in the sense of not updating itself).
Also, how would I ever make a second preset? If I start at my default studio, add and subtract and move around studio panels, then create another preset, it seems I would have 2 presets that have become the same. The only way to do this would be to create the second preset at the beginning and then start changing things. To me (again, this is only me for now) this is the exact opposite of what I would expect.
Obviously, your game and your rules. But I think you'll get more traction (and user acceptance) if the studio presets don't update themselves.

That's a good point. But I am not so sure how much influence we have with our discussions on the developer's priorities 😉
d.

No.
Tags would be applied to arbitrary layers within a document and would be independent of the ordering of the layers - they would not be layers themselves, so such a "switch" would have no meaning.

I tend to agree that both settings should be absent, or both present.
Meanwhile, if you do get Publisher you get other items that are relevant and very useful if you're using enough text that you might need automatic hyphenation: text flow, baseline grids, find/replace, and more. You also get StudioLink, which lets you easily switch among the Publisher, Designer, and (if you own Photo) the Photo Persona.

The sizes are only slightly smaller than the size of text in the menu bar, etc., so it seems to me that if this text is too small for you, then you should basically be at the point of complaining about all of the other apps on your system as well.
This should really be handled globally at the OS level, not in the individual apps.

Because the OP has Windows, it is set here:

This could be tied into global colors easily enough by adding an option to the context menu for a global color swatch to "Select Objects Using this Color" - maybe along with separate ones for fill vs. stroke color?
Obviously this is not a complete solution but it would in theory be low-hanging fruit since the software obviously needs to be able to find those quickly anyway in the event that the global color is redefined, so all of the basic pieces should already be there, and that context menu seems like a logical place to put such an option (though again not the only place, particularly since someone working on an imported document is unlikely to be working with global colors).
 
That is actually the context in which I originally suggested the tagging feature, not knowing that someone else had already suggested it a few years prior.  Yes, manually defined tags would cover a lot of what "global layers" should provide, but not everything - there would be a lot of overlap but neither feature need completely replace the other.
For example, with "global layers" you could put content on a master page that would be both above and below the content on an individual page, by placing it on layers above and below that content.  Tags are independent of layer order and so will not help with that.
Tags have an edge over global layers when creating content in multiple languages, as the content for  given language could be spread out across multiple global layers (if both are provided) and still be toggled on and off in one place.

Organization as clutter...  hmm...
 
Both of these suggestions are arguably "automated"... yet neither of them is.  Both require user action for anything to happen.  The suggestion @dominik is making to include "smart tags" of a sort would result in layers automatically being tagged based on their properties (but what good would this be unless you actually do something with those tags), and the typical "select same color/fill/whatever" function is "automated" in that it automatically finds matches when it is asked to.  I think there is room for both, as they serve different purposes.
The tags would be useful if you could perform "bulk actions" on them such as making all of the layers with that tag hidden, etc., in a like manner to hiding a layer they are on.
The direct "select same..." behavior is useful for a more limited, but still quite useful, task of merely selecting the matching layers in one step.
 
Yes, which could be hidden if you don't use them.
 
No, I don't think it should go there.  More likely added to the context menu of the layers panel and/or tags panel for "manually assigned" tags; if "smart tags" are provided the criteria would be edited from some window opened from within the Tag panel and as these would adjust their content automatically they would need no additional interface.
 
Probably best displayed as a single "tag" icon much like the "fx" icon which is displayed when there are layer fx applied; the specific tags could be shown in a tooltip when hovering over that icon, or highlighted somehow in the Tag panel to show which tags apply to the selected layer(s).  Maybe a green dot if all selected layers have that tag and a yellow dot if a smaller subset of them do?
 
Depends on the project.  Sure they should be able to, but sometimes taking that extra time to organize at the start of a large project in particular can safe far more time later in the project.
 
Agreed, which is why I still am of the opinion that the tag discussion, while useful on its own, serves a different purpose than the subject of this thread and should be carried out in a different one.  Tags are for organizing and then performing bulk operations on layers/objects while working on a large or complex project being created from scratch.  The "select same" features requested in this thread are primarily for dealing with imported works that either never had an appropriate organization or lost them as a result of the export/import process (though either feature could certainly be useful in the other situation at times).
 

This is how I could see tags working:
Add a "Layer Tags" panel.  Layer tags are named, in a flat namespace (no hierarchy needed), and global to the entire document (independent of spread or artboard).
Any given layer can have one or more tags associated with it.  A layer which has one or more tags associated with it would show a tag icon in the Layers panel, and the tag icon would be a different color when that tag is selected in the Layer Tags panel, to help identify which layers are associated with a given tag.  Clicking on the tag icon in the Layers panel would select the tag(s) that layer belongs to in the Layer Tags panel.
The Layer Tags panel would have buttons underneath the list of tags to "Create Tag from Selection", "Add Tag(s) to Selected Layers", "Remove Tag(s) from Selected Layers", "Delete Tag(s)", and "Delete Tag(s) and the Layers Tagged With Them", etc...  maybe that last one should be in a context menu or something instead as it is relatively dangerous.
Next to each tag within the list in the Layer Tags panel would be three icons: one would select all layers in the current spread or artboard which are tagged with that tag, one would be a visibility toggle for the tag (eye icon), and one would be a lock toggle for the tag.
A layer which is tagged would be visible if it meets the existing visibility requirements AND at least one of its tags is set to visible.
A layer which is tagged would be locked if the current locking rules would indicate it is locked OR at least one of its tags is set to locked.
 
Build on this by adding tags to the export persona (the way layers can be used there now), etc.
 
Note that this is not a complete replacement for the concept of global layers.  Global layers would impose front-to-back ordering of their contents and force a structure to the document as a layer could only be a member of one global layer at a time, while multiple tags could apply to a given layer and the layers having those tags could be all over the place in terms of z-order.
 
 
Strange bonus idea: adding adjustment layers to tags.  These adjustments would be applied to each layer having that tag, across the entire document.  Not sure if this would be practical or not, or even genuinely useful, but it is a potentially interesting thought so I'm adding it here anyway.

This is how I could see tags working:
Add a "Layer Tags" panel.  Layer tags are named, in a flat namespace (no hierarchy needed), and global to the entire document (independent of spread or artboard).
Any given layer can have one or more tags associated with it.  A layer which has one or more tags associated with it would show a tag icon in the Layers panel, and the tag icon would be a different color when that tag is selected in the Layer Tags panel, to help identify which layers are associated with a given tag.  Clicking on the tag icon in the Layers panel would select the tag(s) that layer belongs to in the Layer Tags panel.
The Layer Tags panel would have buttons underneath the list of tags to "Create Tag from Selection", "Add Tag(s) to Selected Layers", "Remove Tag(s) from Selected Layers", "Delete Tag(s)", and "Delete Tag(s) and the Layers Tagged With Them", etc...  maybe that last one should be in a context menu or something instead as it is relatively dangerous.
Next to each tag within the list in the Layer Tags panel would be three icons: one would select all layers in the current spread or artboard which are tagged with that tag, one would be a visibility toggle for the tag (eye icon), and one would be a lock toggle for the tag.
A layer which is tagged would be visible if it meets the existing visibility requirements AND at least one of its tags is set to visible.
A layer which is tagged would be locked if the current locking rules would indicate it is locked OR at least one of its tags is set to locked.
 
Build on this by adding tags to the export persona (the way layers can be used there now), etc.
 
Note that this is not a complete replacement for the concept of global layers.  Global layers would impose front-to-back ordering of their contents and force a structure to the document as a layer could only be a member of one global layer at a time, while multiple tags could apply to a given layer and the layers having those tags could be all over the place in terms of z-order.
 
 
Strange bonus idea: adding adjustment layers to tags.  These adjustments would be applied to each layer having that tag, across the entire document.  Not sure if this would be practical or not, or even genuinely useful, but it is a potentially interesting thought so I'm adding it here anyway.

This has been suggested a few times already:
 

It would be nice to have a physics engine in Affinity Designer, but I think the app would need to have some animation features added first!

My PhotoLine demo version expired months ago and I decided for now not to buy since it didn't really click with me...  that said, in looking at this further, minus available documentation that would help to explain the tool and the opportunity to play with it given the expired demo, and the docs pointed to here aren't particularly clear either, but I suspect his is implementing something more like the "Hue vs." curves in Resolve?
Playing with the one in Blender seems to bear that out, so yes, that would certainly be a useful addition, though it would be a shame to stop with "Hue vs." and not add the others ("Sat vs.", etc.).

All, there is really no point to all of these "me2" posts and the like - check the "Recommended" post at the top of the page: they are already working on implementing this.
Step back and give them time to do it right.  It's coming.

Sorry, you are correct.  I had looked back to the top of the page and failed to notice that I was on page 6 of the thread...

Sorry, you are correct.  I had looked back to the top of the page and failed to notice that I was on page 6 of the thread...