SrPx

If you are capable to know what design tendencies will be like in next years, you get my full admiration! It changes a lot, constantly, and not very easy to predict. But... In general simplicity (plain quads or in any other form/expression of it) in design is not new. The Bauhaus (art school which very heavily influenced design then and in many years later, and a lot of now can't be explained without it) is from 1919, and its revolution was indeed the focus on the function over decoration, and thus, simplicity was key in many ways. With that influence, minimalism and simplicity has been a mantra in design in many ways through all 20th century, and it is yet now. Consider that more organic and detail loving styles part of a certain nostalgy movement was still very present, the Art Noveau (from the ending of XIX century, and first years of the XX). So... I'd say indeed the last focus back on simplicity is way more "design", in the 20th century concept of it (which one can like or not) than other tendencies. If you remember, or were in the sad moment of the web 2.0, when everyone and his/her dog wanted their logo, website, and even business card be "2.0" I've seen my self (because I like to eat, and dislike having a constant fight with my boss back then, specially during the morning coffee time) doing more Apple-like (by the time!) reflections, subtle freaking soft shadows (so problematic for print, large posters, etc), and freaking rounded fonts, to just name a few. Even certain "3d like" but very slight touch in some elements, the freaking disgrace of the very overused stars with a twisted font insde, the overuse of pastel palettes... Absolutely another demonstration that an artist's, a graphic designer's criteria counted close to nothing inside many companies, unless the designer had an established name and/or a very solid network. Windows 8 came, and a lot of strength in that flat-only tendency, big quads, flat-everything style, and a minimalism, but playing a lot with spaces. (this had been also in 2.0, and is indeed a norm in design. Is not like they are inventing anything amazingly new, with all these "trends", lol.... ) So, I don't see it that way: Design has always, at least since that bauhaus movement where it became more about something to serve the function rather than the embellishment, and a more detailed aesthetics, more about simplicity, reduction, impact, usability, and most of all, synthesis (I don't know if the word is like in my language, now that i stop to think... I mean, the focus on doing a summary, and schema, a certain economy in your language to bring a stronger message without excessive elements). The "horror vacui", the fear to leave empty spaces, that a lot of bosses never understood, that space is an element in design, too, has always been fighting with actual design... is an old fight. That said... I'm probably more like you, more of an illustrator. Heck, I'm a detail lover, a realistic painter, also in my cartoonist branch I prefer the detailed route... But IMO, is good to recognize that there are some disciplines that have its different circumstances and characteristics. When I -had to- started working in design, many years ago, I repeatedly heard -sometimes at my face as an insult- how illustrators, we should stay out of the designers' business (the old accusation of meddling, intrusismo laboral in my language..)... That "Leonardos" were frowned upon... And I believed I was indeed acting wrong ! Until I saw too many of those doing really bad design, and not following certain minimum rules or making the necessary effort... While IMO, everyone should care about own's work quality and creations, not so much in what the neighbour is making... Design changes every month... or week... Is very difficult to know what would bring next years... (within a year range, yeah, maybe easier, but...) And even so, IMHO, nobody is forced to follow absolutely anything unless you work like I worked, as a grunt in a company. Then if your boss tells you it must be that blue, and not this other one, or wants "the logo bigger" , you gotta do so. At least in my area. If in yours there's an unemployment lower than 30%, great for you ! :D :D And BTW, what a boosting thrust for freelancing activity, this type of bosses, hehe. I mean, you can definitely do detailed logos, you can still think them very carefully, and do great logos, even resulting very functional and in the way a logo needs to be, even if you make them detailed... TILL some point. Overly detailed design tends to have practical issues, in the many applications and media it is required to work at. Yet so, you can always find a niche in some very specific cases were still a detailed logo more in the line of realistic art, has its place.

EDIT : But hey, am on Windows, though most of them seem to be cross platform. Nope, not that I noticed, and I tend to be careful. Neither even one of those antivirus or whatever pre-selected, for that I always pick custom install.. With Natron, I installed it iwith 'legacy' marked, as my GTX is even older than the 6xx series (2xx). So, I expect it to run slow, in my arcane machine. Anyway, as FX are going to mostly be done in Blender, not very worried... Of course it'll do 2D rendering slower, as no GPU render, only cpu, and I don't have a 10 core, but hey... (just core i7 1st gen) Anyway, that (low budget) video project -not sure if I got the commission- would take a while yet to begin, but yep, I'll tell you what I might find out, as a "first time user" of those (having basic/average knowledge in a bunch of other editors). In a first glance, the more familiar to me seems Hitfilm, then Fusion, and less, the node based one Natron. (but am used to the nodes concept due to Blender and XSI...) But from a very fast glance, that'd be too much to say...

Actually....Downloaded also Natron and Fusion 8, and installed them as well... Gonna be doing a small video project soon, so, you never know... There's so many options, that can't see the need of an affinity application. (and competing in a more pro way seems crazy, to me, with these tools available, Nuke, etc.)

Just reading your post, installed it... Looks really nice... Plus I don't need a lot of effects in Pro, as I can create them in Blender...(smoke, fire, physics in general, etc) . Indeed , could just use Blender video editor, but is a Blender Area I haven't got too deep into, as at the job used Sony Vegas -and at previous companies, Premiere- , and I'm pleased to say that in a first glance it has a very standard video editing UI (I'm guessing will be piece of cake to learn it...) I mean, wherever they put the limit to pro, I'd just resort to doing that with Blender, as am no video editing professional, is just for web or game videos (not AAA games...)

In this post, I explained how it happens way less when you draw in a non practicable fast speed. I mean, I have seen fast inkers, but never at the speed needed to produce that nose curve profile I show in there, I mean, for doing it without the issues (or almost). Also, a very interesting contribution in that same thread, of a Mac user (the creator of the daub brushes). Seems the issue is more pronounced on Windows. IMO, one can't blame Wacom on this, as every 2D package (vector or raster) I own or have as open source does not have this behavior and issues. Is something specific to AD. (like the issues in AP brush engine). As mentioned, even having purchased AD -and planning AP depending on 1.6 brush features/fixes- , am not really worried about when it will be solved and fixed, neither how. Just adding info here.

Yes, in Pixel mode does not happen, in AD. So, in that module, seems it is doing it right, is that smoothing of the vector once you release. This does not happen in Illustrator or Flash (or Krita and Manga Studio in vector mode), besides in those you can tune up the smoothing in several values (in general in averaging, I don't use same settings for different type of projects (cartoon, line art realistic, etc)). Anyway, probably this all could come solved with 1.6 versions' smoothing... I documented the issue, helping/intervening in a thread another artist started about the matter. She agreed with me on this. Here is the post : https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/29078-wobbly-linework-cintiq-24hd/?p=145035 A bit down below I posted a video demonstrating the problem, but sadly filedropper seems to delete old files... And can't find it now. It showed the issue perfectly. An image though that explained it quite well, I still keep that one : Only mentioning this to add some (IMHO) important context. Not worried on when or how it is addressed. ;) But I believe this and some other thread I posted gave certain info that can be useful once going over the problem.

hehe, that was a bit evil. A lot of them use Linux as a philosophy (I've done so)... And lately, many are paying quite more than the cost of all the serif products put together in the form of donating to several projects. Also they often purchase documentation, as is one of the most known ways -besides extra services and some other stuff- to support open source, other than direct donation. They'd pay for it, the few that they are. As the prob is the general stats, 2% or so...And what an investor has to say about it.

It is planned for around 3075, once robots will have fully replaced us. ;) (sorry, couldn't avoid it....) *......runnnnssss.....*

Yup, Deep Paint 2D and 3D... the 2D was given free later on... Once there wasn't the company there anymore... I had purchased the 3D version. (funnily, I'd be very uncomfortable painting with it today, in comparison to just doing it with Blender). It was around 1200 euros (expensive shipment for my country), if i recall it right, as was too long ago... I learnt to be ready to switch fully my main application in those times...

IMO, save this thread's info (probably not any of my posts' info! ), specially from "pixels to print" ;) , as his info is golden. You will very much need to follow -at least to an extent, like everything is food for thought and integration with your personal way of doing things !- He is basically telling you all the main lines to build the necessary skills, the technical margins to do great logo designs (and other elements). Which BTW, is far from being an easy discipline to master. I'd say.. would be specially good if as well you purchased and have handy on the shelf or even near the bed (is a good reading stuff to get asleep, haha) , books about design theory, color theory, composition, aesthetics and design tendencies. Maybe start with 3 or four books about it, read 'em lightly, meaning, if get stuck in a concept, jump to another book or chapter (then back to the hard ones as u keep evolving), as the main purpose could be to get more into the general knowledge about it. Probably the ones you would enjoy more now though, would be more practical ones about design, but reading some of the very basics (ie, color theory and composition) could be extremely positive. But also, one of my fav points of pxls2prnt is that rules are made to be broken. Don't follow any rule super rigidly or you wont be able to create a single icon. Or do folow these rules first, to get to know why those are an advantage, then you can integrate them as you see best ...if you'd be to keep to rigid with the said rules, you probably wont end up enjoying it too much. The best thing of knowing well those principles is to have later on the freedom of following them or fully breaking them as you see fit. To be able to not use them, IMO, is needed to know what are these things for, in which situations could be not necessary, for certain reasons. Not just going wild... Sometimes am asked for a logo that is actually a realistic illustration, and very detailed ! And I do it, with no hesitation... the client is the king. :) (and that I love doing illustrations, lol... ) About the sketching matter, yep, is true... And actually, if I think about it a bit, specially late years, while I use my wacom in "pencil" mode or the like, and/or I always do large ink brush shapes as well, blocking fast and dirty, erasing very fast with big brushes, etc, as all am looking is for a shape, and yep, usually in black, even those times I start with another tone. (which is perfectly doable, too, of course). You don't want a logo that its shape is not saying a lot of the product by itself already, or at least, that has a very recognizable shape, so that should be a first focus. Not just for this next solely reason, but for example, when you see a logo from very far, ie, at the top of a building, or in a tiny print of a shirt's pocket, you know how much interested is the company in the logo shape being recognized immediately as that logo's brand. Also, helps a lot to remember it in the brain... For a solid impact, an easy image to perceive and remember, the super multi color thing or over-complex shape, or non good contour/shape, are obstacles for getting that impact and to stay in people's memory, help in fast "read". Gradients, reflections, and even less, drop shadows, are a thing that is best to avoid... Even while in the 2.0 times it was almost a contagious bad habit, that every boss and his/her dog would force you to add to the logo... A gradient is the less wrong one to use, but as pxls2prnt, gives probs in replicating in some media. Or even the mere thing of passing the specs to a partner company... a ton of things. Still, there's a bazillion company logos with gradient, some very important ones. Also, is sth more usual in web- focused companies. But a lot of logos created so find their issues when is the time for printing. In that case, I've seen many times how a designer arrived at a company, and even forced a new version, more flat, and better in general... (easy to notice when suddenly they publish a press kit where they include the corporate image guidelines... ;) ). Might sound weird, but I have seen companies that in the press kit zip had just a low resolution gif...and just that.... :S A lot of courses, or even at the college, are not teaching design well... Is not that uncommon. Also, there is a huge difference in a simple 30 hours course, and a degree, or a serious, good master. A pair of things also that I think are key are simplicity and the design accomplishing the function of representing the brand or product. About what you say of changes...yeaahhh... clients often ask for changes in a very demanding way, asking for things that are no good at all for a logo (or whatever other graphical element).... I was once in a company where a lot of these matters were not considered and the designer's criteria counted for literally nothing -if I'd tell you some anecdote, you'd understand till what point was it so...- I made a bit of a veery dirty thing..not recommending you to do the same, but might help to have a global view, maybe...... I used to make like 6 versions (or more), being the two latest my favorite ones. Often I would do those 2 the first ones...they would spend the morning in eternal internal fights about the first 4 logos, released timely, one after another, not at a time.... giving not a freaking single solid reason (with some very rare exceptions) based on design principles or even basic human perception, for going one way or another. Once they have wasted all their fighting bullets, ruined the productivity and time of the company, and feeling more compelled to get to common points of view, then I played the role of making two ones, with "a fresh start" , and even if those had some no-no "things" for one of the fighting parties (is very bad to have several bosses which are fighting among them for reasons ("territory") never related to the graphic work...) they would see the logos WONDERFUL. The pity is sometimes the "place holder" logos had ended better than my more worked out ones, lol... xD. It was really hard to work in that kind of thing back there... So happy of being a freelancer now...In the first years there, I always played dumb showing my first tries first... xD. That said, with normal customers this is a bad path. You'd better do your best, and show them those first. they might revisit it later, even. But just told this as you will find all sorts of people out there for these tasks... My advice though, is adapt to the client's requirements, but always add suggestions or your own takes. You never know, and very often get approved your versions, as initially, the customer doesn't know , in many cases, and consider they are wanting you to do it because they have -usually- no knowledge about the matter. I have also a portion of my work, my duty, - be it when I am doing graphic design, illustration, 3D or pixel art- , that wouldn't call it "educating" the client, as I've heard sometime, as that sounds arrogant to me, but just the same when a mechanic needs to explain me a bit -lightly- what was going wrong with my car, and so for me to understand why has he changed a piece, you should probably explain some things to the customer as well. But don't get her/him bored... ! ;D In any case, as said at the beginning, follow pxls2prnt advices, they're very solid. ( I am more a bit of a big mouth chit chatter that never shuts up, you know me ;D )

No product on earth is "safe" . :) I've had a collection of tools that have seen their closing or company's bankruptcy (Deep Paint 3D , XSI Foundation, etc, etc) . And they costed me tons of money, unlike this non significant cost. It isn't like you are risking anything to be even considering, in money terms (although it depends on the country you live in) , I'm guessing you are fearing it for the time and effort investment. In that case, is neither huge risk, as most tools are very similar (indeed, Affinity's have a very similar usage philosophy to Adobe suite, PS specially. And a lot of tools have gone that route. ) I'd say you shouldn't worry that much. What people don't get is that software entire lines/suites have ceased production in every company, for very similar reasons, usually as technology advances new code base is needed, etc. In this case, is a more professional line which is replacing a useful but more amateur one. I have been a user of Serif's products, to an extent (never were my core tools), and even considering the switch, they still are providing you with very cheap tools, just more professional. Also, don't be afraid of having to switch at some point of main software. You eventually change your PC or Mac due to new needs, and there's no drama. Besides, what serves you now for your actual needs : retouching and editing photos can serve for a very, very long time, if it serves you right now. You, in theory, could keep that machine with the same OS, non updating -so I have some family machines- even if MS or Apple support in updates would have ceased (ie: no more updates now for Windows Vista, old versions of iOS, etc), even disconnected from inet, if viruses would concern you, and have that machine functioning for many years, serving exactly for that, for photo retouch (and if it'd break, I've seen how there's always a chance to purchase later on refurbished/second hand PCs that work just fine, and give that software even a bunch of years more of usage.). But IMO, you won't do that, even if you plan for it... As most of us, will probably update at some point the machine, the OS, and/if when needed, the Affinity's version, or if it happens that you end up seeing a new suite somewhere else that cuts it better for you, then you will switch. My advice: If something (ie, Affinity's tools) serves you just fine now, keep using it and don't worry so much. What only matters is what you produce with it, with whatever the software application. I know my opinion might sound a bit extreme, but am very convinced of the above explained...

Nice :)

Then IMO, provide a version for going over black backgrounds or very dark ones, another for white/clear. Anyway, this should have been spoken with the client... Some would want that option, some not. Some know from start the logo, no matter what, will always go over a black backgrounds (or white). there are millions of situations. The correct thing to do is provide certain number of versions for different media, sizes, etc. The border (outline stroke) is a bad decision in most logos. besides looking a bit amateurish usually (unless certain special touch or matter justifies it). Go for plain body text instead, much more elegant, and offers no problems when reducing to small sizes. All what that border is gonna do in those is add blur and confusion. Also, as mentioned, it is not adding anything important. The black and white for the shape.. yep, that's always said in schools (studied Fine Arts, later a master in design)... You can develop later on a certain habit, not necessarily do it so all times... (imho). Also.. about drawing the concept in paper... I'd agree, but... maybe some decades ago, back in '91 when I got my first digital tablet and pen, would have agreed more. Today.. Inking (like for comics or illustration line art) nope, not at all (doable but not preferring it), but sketching... almost the same than with a piece of paper.. . Creativity can also be "trained" , there are factors more important than if you are using a real piece of good old paper or not... (plus, there's great software mimicking greatly pencil feel. Even you can do so with clever settings on a simple rounded brush in 90% of the 2D packages. )

Interesting ...! :)

Very nice graphic work. :)

Yep, I started in 3D actually using way more arcane things, like organica, TrueSpace 1, and 3DS Studio for MSDOS (1,2..etc). Then jumped to Max 1.0 during a master, the UI changed brutally to me. So much that got a bit angry I went back to those other not so established alternatives. Later, had to fully master 3DS Max, as started to work at game companies. In those, I fully got into character rigging/weighting (some anim) and scene handling, certain amount of modeling, but my core organic and objects modeling has been always with alternatives. Mostly Wings3D, but being only a low/mid pol (or subdiv) modeler, I ended switching more and more tasks to Blender (uvmapping, 3D painting and rendering being the first ones). Low res topology cage (for the workflow high detail --> low version generation) is sth really doable now in Blender, with or without that ultra cheap plugin. Lately, using a wild lot for commercial projects, very successfully, Blender's scene, material, and rendering with its great Cycles renderer. The original renderer is very god for animation, but not doing much of that lately (apart from the typical 3D intro for video and so). Also, got very used to the material nodes system....So is Cycles all the way. Haven't tried much external renderers though, I follow the rule of trying to do all what I can with Blender official. One exception is using some importers/exporters, and the 3D printing plugin. Also, STL I/O native works great, for that stuff. Blender, Krita and Wings3D are probably my 3 favorite open source tools ever (I do ALL my 3D now with Wings and Blender! (sometimes Sculptris, too)). And they are -IMO- professional now, in what they can do. Although in several aspects, not complete, to compete in some fields. But 100% usable in any professional workflow, in good hands and being prepared to supply some tasks by another tools. Still, worths it, by far, to go including them in the every day workflow (this comes to support my argument, the pov of using already Affinity in whatever stage of the project they can cover things well). IE, I use Inkscape also, and Gimp, and this sometimes help me in very critical situations. It's just that they are not yet so central in my "arsenal". For video, in every company I land at, I almost demand to purchase Sony Vegas. For simple promotional videos for the web, with some effects (combined with Blender power) that tool rocks in ease of use (and the price is very affordable) and solid output. And of course, very recently added Affinity's to the group. :). There are a bunch others, just I use them less. (Scribus, Synfig, Paint.net, Gale sprite Animator, Tile Studio, etc, etc) Well, like in many things in Blender, I end up concluding is best to go their way. They have it better thought than I firstly estimated, and in the end, I've become used to the large switch from using Blender to Wings (but turn table, pan, zoom, I configure them to work the same) and any other tool. In Blender, IMO is more productive to leave rmb for selecting and all that. I joined Elysiun forums (blenderartists since a while) back in 2002, but had been using Blender since quite before 1.0. It was initially a not really very practical nurbs editor, little more than that... And the internal renderer lacked in way too many areas. It has rained a crazy lot since then..Today is a very solid 3D solution for many fields (I'd say... mostly all that has some even slight relation with 3D). Yep, there was and probably is yet, UI themes to make it work and look very similar to Max...IMO, nice for welcoming Max users, but not that practical to get the most possible out of Blender...Still, I tend to set a clear background theme, I am not comfortable with default dark backrgound/UI... And indeed wish I could set a larger font (I'm 44, and when trying to work without glasses (90% of the time)... hehe), but at least if one sets one of those themes is totally fine. Something similar happened to me in several game companies. Today I'm told (I keep some friends that still did not left that industry (give 'em time, haha)) it is a bit more flexible, but still one needs to be able to provide the stuff in the final integration tool format. Usually Maya or Max. No matter if it is animation / CG, games, or whatever (well, FX tends to be Houdini, but that's the one profile I have not gone for) one needs to provide the assets problem-free for those. I found a lot of resistance to specifically let me use Wings3D for the base mesh, specially in characters, but 100% of the cases did let me fully work with it after showing the results, and demonstrating how I dealt with it at work. Blender...not really, (I mean, I did not even request it) as I only became more productive with, I mean, got to use it more, just some years ago. Still, I remember using it in a sort of arcade machine games company, for generating the rendered pics, many years ago... :D Of course! You are welcome. :)

I indeed can very easily realize that they are listening (quite more than other companies). If they don't go with the ideal plans for some individuals, that's another thing...They do have their plan, and I bet extremely well thought. Been my every day work tool (PS) since '95 (and as am lucky to be able to say I have never been unemployed, that'd be around 23 years of deep, intense usage) , worked at 10 companies, and while I have never cared much about those two features (I tend to prefer the core tools and do the same effects "old school", by hand, as I get more control. Similar stuff with a bunch of filters ) , what I can clearly see is that, in general, AP is a very serious competitor, right now, even with the bugs.

Hmmm... if that'd to be certain (I have my very doubts on that first statement) I'd say it would be in any case as seems AD has been more time in development, so might be more mature. Also, obviously AP is trying to do all what an app like PS or equivalent does and allows to make today... And that is a crazy lot, a very complex orchestra to play. I'd expect so a very complex development.

Darkclown, it was not something really directed at you (anyway, only opinions, nothing personal...) specifically, don't worry. Is more of a general feel....I dunno. Is it that I have super powers ? Maybe is that... These aren't betas in my usage by any stretch... Am not having "constant crashes" nor seeing it unusable. It has crashed some times, I'd say about the same number of times other way older apps do crash on me. The difference is the older ones, I know better what those apps don't "like", so I have my workarounds to avoid the situations. Yep, I don't "paint" with them, probably I will -maybe- with 1.6, but I have used Affinity's apps quite, and is like two different worlds here, what I hear from some users, and what i have experimented in actual projects. Again, I dunno, maybe I'm martian or sth. Really, when I see a too demanding (again, not meaning you specifically) user base -actually is a small part of it, just the people happy is silent, even while they are probably legions- I tend to quite not get the inspiration, then. I need to see a less selfish attitude (in general) . Also, as i mentioned, I took the decision of keep using "my" open source tools and a pair of purchased for my regular workflow. Works great, as it always did. Anyway, I tend to vary a lot of main application, this habit began with jobs where I needed to switch team, machine and project even many times in a day, but got the habit. Is a seriously good one, as you evolve crazily fast this way. Also, find no UI hard at the end of the day. Maybe also I come from open source communities, and while there's always very demanding people everywhere, the majority has quite more patience... Someone could tell me that that's natural, as they have not paid a dime, but would be unfair, as a lot have donated to the whatever the project hundreds of dollars (way more than 50), and invest TONS of more time (writing full manuals, and being extra helpful in forums, is another scale of things) than the most helpful guy here, and for free. Maybe I'm used to that and is not your fault, just that the contrast is too strong for my taste. But let me tell you this : A too much complaining or confronting attitude with the developers, never *ever* ended well. A patient one, and just assuming the greatest mantra: " Will be done when it's done " is not only better for devrs as then they focus only in programming and boost everything (also way more inspiring for them to find some more flexibility in the other side after they really -some of you can't even imagine...I have been in several, and staying till 2:00 AM - 5:00 AM, and/or not even sleeping, killing a full weekend working and only working, day and night, with pizza for breakfast - long days of work) , it is indeed, actually better too for the users -lower stress, and well, in a more serious note, just simply is best to realize what is the actual situation, the real situation, and do your plans as you need to (as I did, I'm painting mostly on Krita). But... I have realized, very, very often, that a lot of the people complaining... I have been explaining how to deal with their issue, as there was not a lack in the software, just the user only wanted to make things in one way (often just the way is used to from a single ONE another app!! ), stuck in his/her brain that had to be so, no matter what. Happily, a number of them did seem happy when I explained it to them (90% of the times not having yet even faced the feature need, improvising as i post, not wasting even really significant time), but was useless, as when several of them found a new problem, went back to the attitude, while my main purpose was not to teach the specific solution, but kind of demonstrate how the user can generate completely valid workarounds when a feature doesn't do what he/she expected. next issue : --> back to demanding complain instead of following that procedure. Now... that does not encourage me at all in making more tutorials or address usage/workarounds for issues to users. I can see how it wont inspire/encourage programmers, either. Speaking about boats -someone mentioned it- is the view that we are all in the same boat. Having patience is the best way to help, often... Is also taking the habit of learn your tricks by yourself as well (well, that benefits mostly the user, and for ever) I think is VERY good and positive to report issues, and explain well what could be working better and why, and even explain your suggestions for improvements. And extremely useful when professionals (like recently happened with a gradient problem -being addressed- in PDF export) detect important, critical problems in a professional workflow, and even provide test cases, example files, specific path to replicate, and in sum, make life a lot more easier to developers to hunt the bug, or better said, so that they can place it firmly in the long to-do list. (although IMO cases like that get priority as is the main core functionality to actually "work" with the tool, professionally. And A. apps aren't toys. ) My issue is when users go past that. When you have reported, and done all what you can, and the team is obviously overwhelmed with work to answer a crazily active forum, just stop there, don't endlessly complain as, IMO, you are not getting more than that... useful reports are critically important. Graphic material, screens, to help and catch the bug, I guess they are super helpful (I did a good amount of that in its time). Constant complaining about...communication...why my app is not yet in the shelves, the web sections, why is not this or that app in every platform, or, my personal favorite, why this is not done like in Adobe PS. These are, in my opinion, not useful, and worse, very damaging for the project. And kind of makes one think if the people posting those really think there's a huge army behind development or something, here... But maybe I am indeed martian, crazy, from another planet or something. Could be very possible, who knows... @Verysame. SO, so true !. I yet remember with pain in some companies... A bug in Character studio or skin, no where documented, not mentioned in any specialized article, noo one in the staff knowing about it... Until my usual savior those days, CG Talk, searching posts (even years old) from people seasoned enough in every battle, from some month, some isolated post, one artist or designer had been able to invent a fixing work around... of course, not a single word, in every place on earth about the issue in the support forums (true that were very specific issues in production, very deep, but those which appear when the demo deliver is in just some hours....) And yep, was not one brand or product. In the days equivalent to today's development status in these apps -just that Aff. is making in months what they did in years- it was crashy land in all apps. Premiere, Max, PS, Flash, Dreamweaver... One needed to KNOW what will crash when and how, one learned it to avoid it. You said plugins...yeah... forest or hair plugins, among my "favourites". Or TGA alpha channel not exported from PS, while was the most critical game 2D format in certain time... Today all this apps are great, but trust me, not free of bugs. PS is an absolute wonder, I agree, and I'd say most of the CC suite is. I would never -never have- said otherwise. But is not that rare that suddenly the wacom driver has an issue with a lates CC Ps, or a collection of other things. And reason why a lot of people do not even update wildly. (inded, sensible specially when you are in complex projects, with ANY software. ) My opinion about the general status of the apps: They are good, solid and very usable (and the very key, most important thing: they have a very bright future). There are issues in every application in the world, and, reporting is good when done in an useful (for both parts) manner. I feel is not fair to call them "beta" (is even a bit offensive, imo ) or non usable. I have been testing them deeply, reported issues, solved issues to another users. There are things to polish, but a lot of work can be done with them already.

Sorry, but leaving that pass by would be unfair. I have been reading a good number of the threads you mention, have even participated in them, replying, and have seen the entire thing happen. They (Affinity staff) did reply every matter and aspect. But I instead observe an opposite pattern here : They reply about all what is their duty to reply. If you insist in that you don't like the situation, that you want to have all solved now, they choose not to reply repeatedly what they can only answer to that: which surely is that It will be implemented when it will be implemented (when humanly possible). They physically can't do more. The thing is I can testify that this has happened at least in all the ones that I have read from you, of the complaint type (not the other posts, often very helpful or positive). Compared to Adobe that would make me smile as a good joke ;) ;) Besides, dedicated to Affinity (Serif has a lot of other stuff in its plate) only a small few, and I believe part of them spending a huge amount of time supporting, replying all of our questions, issues, posting in twitter announcements and even caring for the web (thus the communication prob...even in some tiny dev companies I worked at, that'd would have been crazy. Devrs would only work in the core applications code. I myself was mainly in charge of all the web front end (code and design) stuff (3 to five portals, surely similar to Serif, in volume, maybe a bit more) and I can tell you that this itself alone is a huge time eater. ) Exactly. It seems a lot of people is fine to back a Kickstarter project, so to get the app or game of their dreams, and wait even 2 years without even a trial access to it... You get here a similar amount to put, but you get to use it, and BTW, I can -and have- used it in my professional work. You are able and allowed to find out work around tricks for issues, etc. Kindda disagree here, too. You will -possibly, depending on your patience and if you see the big picture here, (not many can)...- get a tool that in the end would be VERY usable, and able to completely replace a suite that forces a renting and which price is probably going to be raised (not criticizing that: They can do whatever they want with their business, and CC apps are amazing) , for a presumably low price, even if a bit higher in the future, but still, even in the worse case, you will get a much better deal than the other way. Honestly, this, and the above sentence on mentioning that Serif has a big staff (as if all the company could dedicate every single person to the Affinity line)... seems to me you don't believe they have a small team dedicated to this (otherwise I can't see the logic on that sentence) and that the official posts made by them, that the issue is that it is hard to find a very, very specific developer profile, is somehow not true? Because I have not a single doubt about it (my boss in a previous company had exactly this problem, just in a very different field. IT has become extremely specialized.). And being so, is not that they are not appreciating your engagement: Is mostly obvious to me the other way around: You are not appreciating theirs... Not being harsh, here, just writing what am seeing...

Indeed, that suite has had lots of issues in many of its applications, that indeed lasted years. Other applications like 3ds Max, were at times a full concert of bugs, some versions were close to unusable (and the UI concept: much worse than Affinity's ! ). The tool is tons better now, but just to mention how not just in the first 2 years, but even for much longer times, very established apps of today had a past full of nightmares... I totally agree. Specially because the more demanding tasks are in the professional world, and in this we need solid, error free functionality and stability, as a must. The "do it all" apps covering a crazy load of fields ( or diverting a small company's resources in a bazillion of apps, which is probably more of an older Serif focus, maybe. IMO, less professional than the Affinity line (a different business)) isn't good even for the hobbyists *IMO*... I hope that does not mean we can't as well give a point of view ! Neither would be healthy to leave here the impression that ALL the users find the apps useless of full of issues, as I am professional (as a freelancer and have worked in a bunch of companies) and find it pretty useful, with the limitations expected to find in a very new line of applications as also in every work in progress project. And BTW, I notice more aggressivity or less politeness in several -not all- of the complaints rather than in the users who post a more positive feedback about the A. applications. I am a professional, too. From a different field, maybe, though. But that'd favor my point, as indeed one of the most lacking areas is the brush engine (ie, for drawing line art, illustration, comic). Still, IMO the issue here is if people is, with a totally new application, wishing to fully replace PS or AI all of a sudden. That'd be wrong, for now. I cannot use AP for painting (I mean, drawing, as painting... could somehow do...), I mean, I totally could but I have a better brush / draw behavior in other apps I own or that are open source (Krita's engine is very hard to beat), so I do like I have done in my entire professional life, I just use what is practical to use for whatever the tasks. And as the apps will go evolving, more and more tasks will be able to be moved to Affinity's. If you prefer to have it all now and ready, perfect, (you will still have issues with the top dogs, btw) , then you should just use only CC. My take, and am as pro as any one else that do this for a living, is: For now I can "only" (I mean, that's a lot) use AP for image editing and other applications like Krita or Manga Studio for line art drawing, at least until AP and AD 1.6 hit the store. And AP for whenever I need files preparation, cmyk (well, quite a number of things in this matter are already supported by the others, as well, but IMO, not to the same degree and completeness than you have in AP or AD) color stuff, etc. Also, using AD only for vector illustration not "hand drawn" (but I do a lot of vector work using only the mouse, since... always. ). This is a WIP path, is the -IMHO- only correct way to take it, as this SUPER cheap apps go evolving, you will be able to transfer more and more stages of your work to them. If you want to fully replace your some decades old suite NOW, it will depend on your professional or hobbyists needs. Not all work flows find stones in their way. IMO, you are getting all what they can provide for now with their resources. Excessive and constant complaining is, like someone else phrased already, a bit of beating a dead horse. They will always do all what I can, I'm sure about it. if he plans to fully replace CC's PS or AI, totally. If he could get my focus instead (patience is involved in the process, of course) of realizing that if there are stones in the usual work flow the user has, the only chance is to keep using other tools (I'd still purchase for in case a future price raise, as this apps are extremely low priced, IMO. ) and only do "some" work (some stages in a project) with them, for now, but keep growing in knowledge about the apps, so you can help your own path in it. This is not some stupid fantasy of mine: I have done so with Blender, Inkscape, Krita, Gimp, Sony vegas, Virtual Dub, Ultimate Unwrap, Netfabb and a very large etc. IE, initially I only knew how to use deply the main apps (Adobe's, Autodesk's...) I only used Inkscape for some very basic vector work and auto tracing images which is an usage very compatible with AD, as it can't trace for now, but you can totally auto trace in inkscape and import in AD, just as you can also do your line art carefully drawn in Krita and do the final or medium stages in AD or AP, but when working at a certain company (not willing to purchase too much software) I ended up doing corporate work with Inkscape (still needing for final touches in other apps). Blender, I initially only used it for exporting to some game engines, ended up modeling, uv mapping, texturing, 3D painting, and rendering (a lot). And so on. A tool may be not to as complete or finished (or in a finished status) as the main dominant one, and still be professional if known its limitations and in what areas of your work you can use it. The key thing is the future option that it opens.... I mean, I am not into photo editing -I have done a lot that type of work in the past- but more in the illustration, comic, and graphics for game fields. I should be ultra angry, due the state of the brush performance and stuff... And is not like I haven't looked at it closely. If you have been around since a certain time -not too much- I made very long posts of my findings and testings of issues (both AP and AD), and also providing workarounds for users, so, I know what level of issues are we talking about. I simply don't get how can't people see that what they are doing is all they can do, and that is very easy to see how the applications do evolve, at the pace that is possible, but quite significantly (fast for what an usual application development pace is, if you have some experience watching it from inside). Trashing an app because can't be fully used (*for now*) to replace your entire work flow that you have with another way much older application, it's a big error, IMO. This is my opinion, like you have yours. And we both have the right to express it. IMO here there are two options : Just move away and keep paying the CC renting (and/or its current or future raises. Or, if your work flow recommends it and you feel you would have it all covered, purchasing instead Corel apps, or Xara's ), and forget for ever about Affinity, or, second possibility, keep using what you are using now (be it CC, corel, open source or whatever) but get already the apps (now that they're still dirty cheap, lol), and start integrating all you can or your work flow with these apps. Obviously the latter is my choice. And I truly believe is a wise one. Otherwise I would not mention it.

I see. Thank you both for the information. :)

Oh, but it is not tied to a specific machine, or is it ? I mean, if one has a Windows version, and purchases a new PC with Windows (I don't mean having two licenses working simultaneously in both PCs), there's no need to purchase a Windows license again, it'd be only the case of willing to use it with a different operative system (or that I supposed).

Don't hate saying it, ;) is no problem at all... Just opinions. ;) Anyway, it was not in a harsh tone or whatever. More of about a vision of things, about being practical, that's all. Well, I guess I have developed a strong habit of reading between the lines and being skeptical by default, whenever reading any commercial announcement (you, know, when even super solid and prestigious companies, the top dogs, do even worse statements : " The most professional 2D retouch ever created" ... and is just a toy for hobbyists not having much of a clue !) of any sort (or reading a review, etc), probably more than other people... Of course, those details fixed and improved, in the post above listed, would leave better image, I don't deny it. I just have grown in me this tendency of only count on what is readily available (and even so, only making a plan if a serious test of myself concludes in it being really up to the task), and only make plans with the things I can count on, or solely depend on my own. That might be the difference. Plus, really, have seen so many delays, so many promises not fulfilled, surprising changes of plans, etc, etc, in companies like MS, Apple, HP, Lenovo, (and I really like all of them) even my loved Dell made some things at times that would have made me run from ever purchasing anything for them.. And still, 90 % of my family's computers are of that brand, thanks to me, basically... is the comparison what is not being -IMO- fully considered, as is what I was referring to as 'context'. IE, if in a region, you call a painter to paint your house, and every one comes in less than 2 hours, and does an excellent job, for a fair price, is not the same than in a region where you call one and after 3 months you get a reply and the professional makes a bad job, after charging a lot, and there's no other person for that in many kilometers. I mean, obviously each thing is what it is, objectively, of course, that is true. And this might be a very personal position, but to me, context , market global status, etc, is essential when thinking about these matters... Like all the rest, and my previous comment, is just my opinion... You can differ as much as you desire, super obviously... ;)

I got curious.. seems as expected, the best part of these new imac 5k is the screen... geez....5k resoluton is nice, but not sth I care for. BUT... it supports DCI P3 color gammut, supposedly (tests always put lower what each company announces) 130% wider than sRGB (extra red and greens, but same blues/cyans) ! . Also, 78 to 86 % (tests differ...) of Adobe RGB spectrum (mine is a nec pro range and goes higher than that, but still, very good bang for the buck (globally), I suppose...) The contrast is fine, too, 1160:1. The uniformity, not so good (back lighting seem to dim a little in some corners). If that's only the issue, not super bad for me, my work tend to always happen at the center of screen, corners are close to never used. Still, this data is not from my favorite 2 (sometimes I look in depth articles in Tom's hardware, too) sites for screens. But overall, seems a great monitor.