SrPx

https://youtu.be/x3P8Ucnqh0U
Ok, so I finally was able to get the issues to reproduce while OBS was recording.
Mouse Cursor Issue: 
In this video you find the first issue which is the cursor not following the stylus but instead the mouse. While using the stylus the cursor seems to be "Off Screen" until you use the mouse to bring it back into visibility. While using OBS you'll notice the cursors icon just sit in the center of screen and resizes as I use the hotkeys to resize the brush tip.
Alt+Click (Stylus) Color Picking:
You see that the remainder of the video is me attempting to color pick using the stylus and alt button to quickly color pick to no avail. This absolutely critical for any painter/illustrator in either Designer or Photo (Happens in both). I do love what AD and AP having going I just think there needs to be some critical improvements to the bugs mentioned and the overall performance of the brush engine.
I find, like a couple folks have in previous threads, that the brush tools seem to have a "stiffness" or "lag" to there performance which really is a motivation crusher when wanting to stay the Affinity atmosphere for illustrating. Right now I try to keep my head down for as long as I can tolerate because the work flow is amazing in Affinity products. The only area I find issue with is the brush tools performance. 
Bear in mind, I love the work you all do! So please, keep up the fantastic work! @Mark Ingram

Is there anything I can offer to the dev's that could help in assisting the diagnosis of the issue?
This is one of the most critical workflow needs for any illustrator/artist that is looking to paint in either Designer or Photo. Having to stop using the stylus to then use the mouse and keyboard (just to alt color pick) is probably one of the worst issues to deal with when just trying to color pick quickly.
In the scale of needs I'm sure it doesn't appear to be worthy at the moment but is a major factor for lots of illustrators.
Does this issue relate to the very small delay that the stylus has in response time?This happens on the iPad as well but not as much as with Windows. 

Hello,
I recently came across a previous thread which I cannot find now that mention folks having issues with using the alt color picking function while using the brush tools. 
The issue: trying to alt select color picking while using the brush tool shows the zoom loupe but it is very jittery and doesn't select color at all or is completely inaccurate)
I wanted to mention that I share their agony and have been using the latest official release and beta. The previous thread had mentioned that the lastest beta would have corrected the issue but it hasn't corrected the issue on my end. (could have been mistaken though)
Not trying to duplicate threads just could find the previous thread, feel free to merge if possible. 

useful comment.

Thanks again to all of you you for the positive reactions to my work

I did this one yesterday, The Trio Of Mischief



 

Click here to download the latest beta
Status: Customer Beta
Purpose: Features, Improvements, Fixes
Requirements: A valid product key (for Affinity Store purchases), or an installation of the full retail version from the Microsoft Store

As this is a beta it is considered to be not suitable for production use. This means that you should not attempt to use it for commercial purposes or for any other activity that may be adversely affected by the application failing, including the total loss of any documents. We hope you enjoy the latest build, and as always, if you've got any problems, please don't hesitate to post a new thread in this forum and we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Thanks once again for your continued feedback. 

If you have a general question about the software, please head over to the Questions Forum, or if you have any suggestions, please head over to the Feature Requests forum.
Fixes
Fixed Expand Stroke to iterate all strokes Added optional curve orientation in the Node/Pen/Corner tools Added ability for sub-curves to be reversed independently Further Expand Stroke improvements Fixed converting to text frame to preserve corners Fixed inabilty to set the margins for Artboards in the Guides Manager Fixed curve expansion with arrow heads generating incorrect results on certain curves Improved performance when exporting certain documents to PDF Added support for JBIG2 compressed images during PDF import Fixed enter key closing the Preferences dialog when searching Added new New Document dialog Fixed ability to load multiple instances of the same document simultaneously Fixed History panel separator colours Fixed xor selection by click Removed duplicate image types from file dialogs Fixed installer unexpected reboot Fixed Cog shape only allowing up to 48 teeth 1.8.0.532 release notes

Click here to download the latest beta
Status: Customer Beta
Purpose: Fixes
Requirements: A valid product key (for Affinity Store purchases), or an installation of the full retail version from the Microsoft Store

As this is a beta it is considered to be not suitable for production use. This means that you should not attempt to use it for commercial purposes or for any other activity that may be adversely affected by the application failing, including the total loss of any documents. We hope you enjoy the latest build, and as always, if you've got any problems, please don't hesitate to post a new thread in this forum and we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Thanks once again for your continued feedback. 

If you have a general question about the software, please head over to the Questions Forum, or if you have any suggestions, please head over to the Feature Requests forum.
Fixes
Fixed CR3 files from Canon G5X Mark II not being supported Fixed Colour model switching for masks (to always switch to Greyscale slider) Fixed Adjustment thumbnail not updating correctly after cropping Fixed floating Scope panel on secondary monitor moves around after app restarts Fixed Radial Blur Live Filter artifacts when rasterised or merged Fixed Batched RAW files appearing darker than expected Changed soft edges to be optional in the selection brush Fixed EXIF panel empty Lens value when we haven't been able to generate a Lens ID Improved performance when exporting certain documents to PDF Added support for JBIG2 compressed images during PDF import Fixed enter key closing the Preferences dialog when searching Added new New Document dialog Fixed ability to load multiple instances of the same document simultaneously Fixed History panel separator colours Fixed xor selection by click Removed duplicate image types from file dialogs Fixed installer unexpected reboot Fixed Cog shape only allowing up to 48 teeth 1.8.0.532 release notes

Yes! We all know that. Affinity's suite integration is about the smoothest I've seen in a suite. I also (deeply) agree on the advantages of using a tool similar to Photoshop for digital painting, even if not PS, neither Photo have been designed with that as a main focus. That fact has not stopped legions of very high end professionals to use PS, outstanding concept artists and many other profiles, all over the globe. Yep, it still needs certain corners polished, but I do believe it can be already used. I have not transferred fully my workflow in painting (I still use CSP in a significant degree), as much as I have done so in Designer with my vectors' work, but I plan to do so in a big extent, at least. The light weight of these apps vs other suites' apps is another attractive characteristic of Affinity.
Kudos on whatever the self improvement journeys, and your art looks great, as always.
Photo has seen strong improvements for painting in some of the latest betas, so, I'm quite optimistic. 
My workflow with Designer, tho, keeps being helped by Inkscape (it has allowed me also to reevaluate (again... as I've used it as main vector tool at several jobs) the surprising depth of that free app) for the features yet to be added to Designer. All in all, am quite happy, with both tools.
 

@SrPx: too true, also PS wasn't intended for digital painting (not as much as Corel Painter was), but look at what it has become. I'm sure Photo will get there, once it fixes some aspects. I'd love if it implemented rulers like CSP (I used it a lot for inking, in various projects) , maybe just turning the paths in "traceable" , and it made the brush category sorting better, but it is on its way. I've found some interesting workarounds, and there are aspects I use a lot for painting that I find more intuitive (such as clipping and its live filters). And Designer...just one thing, and then it is up there and I won't need anything else - free transform, perspective transform etc. (oh yes, perspective grids for both).  Then I'll be the happiest user Affinity has!
@Roger C It is!
Speaking of which, here is some more of the combo, I did earlier last year when in Tokyo
 
 
 

Dreamy combo!

Anyway, sorry all for being away, I've been focusing so much in these last few months on self improvement, experimenting and all sorts of things. And my workflow has become very much an organic exchange between Designer and Photo. I've always wanted to explore how much Photo can be an alternative to Photoshop for digital painting (Designer kills Illustrator in my opinion), and the fact I can switch so easily between the two programs has urged me to find solutions for digital painting as well. 
It is getting there, there are a few things that should be addressed, but I'd say that one can do about 90% of things that one can do on Photoshop, but with the bonus of this Designer-Photo synergy, without considering costs etc. I hopefully will expand more on this later, but I'll start with the "end" - as it is a style I've been trying out lately. 
Here we have a balance of say, 7% Photo and 25% Designer. More soon, as this forum means a lot as I know that people know what I'm talking about in terms of cross-software use, which means a lot to me!
 
 

Status: Beta
Purpose: Stability and General Testing
Requirements: Purchased Affinity Publisher
Windows Store: Not submitted
Download: Download
Auto-update: Not Available
---
Hi,
We are pleased to announce that a new Customer Beta of Affinity Publisher (1.8.0.549) is now available as a download from the link above.
As this is a 'Stability and General Testing' beta it is considered to be not suitable for production use. This means that you should not attempt to use it for commercial purposes or for any other activity where you may be adversely affected by the application failing, including the total loss of any documents. 
We hope you enjoy the beta, and as always, if you've got any problems installing or running up, please don't hesitate to post in this thread. 
Any problems actually using this version please make a new topic in this forum and we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Please feel free to leave general suggestions and comments in the Discussion Forum. 
Many thanks for your continued feedback.
---
Fixes and Updates
New Document Dialog
(Win) Implemented new New Document / Template dialog
(Mac) Miscellaneous fixes
General
Layers thumbnails now update when a global colour is changed
Convert to text frame now preserves corners
Fixed creation of unnecessary duplicates in Resource Manager / Collect...
Added 'Show in Explorer / Finder' to Resource Manager
Document Grid drawn incorrectly when switching between Master and Regular View
Fixed crash adding assets from afpub file
Assets imported via an afasset file aren't made visible if no categories currently exist
Can now search for missing fonts via Find and Replace
Fixes for Baseline Grid propagation from Master Pages
Preflight
Preflight check for missing glyphs
Text
Fixed crash in text composition. Recent regression
Fixed for Even / Odd Page Breaks
Fixes for Pinning Page UI
Column Rules now honour Text Wrap
Fixed Text Wrapping issues that could occur with large negative borders
Wrap settings saved in an objects style weren't correctly applied
Added more 'special characters' to the Bullets and Numbering character pick lists
Fixed Text Styles Panel preview for styles with a large 'Space Above'
'Word Joiner' and 'Zero Width Non-breaking Space' can now be entered with ToggleUnicode, and have their own "Show Special" representation.
Pasting text with Move Tool active now appends content to non-filler text rather than replacing
Warning now given when attempting to spell check text with no suitable dictionary available
Improved Title Exceptions granularity to never change certain words
Specific font incorrectly keeps italics activated
(Win) Drop Scale for Descenders option was missing
(Win) Previews on Typography Panel corrupted
Tables
Deleting row(s) in table caused alignment settings to reset
Table format > Frame stroke alignment is not remembered when changing the width
TOC
Pinned Frames now use the location of their pin to influence the order of TOC entries
(Win) TOC Panel was missing separator field
Index
Fix occasional crash opening Index Panel
Import
PDF Import: PDF Import now supports JBIG2 compression.
DOCX Import: DOCX Import now supports linked images
IDML Import: Shift+Tab (Right Indent Tab) not imported
IDML Import: Gutter values could be incorrect
Export / Print
PDF Export: Images in Embedded Documents weren't downsampling to correct DPI leading to unnecessarily high-res bitmaps.
JPEG Export: Include bleed was missing
Updated Help and Translations
---
To be notified about all future Windows beta updates, please follow this notification thread 
To be notified when this Publisher update comes out of beta and is fully released to all Publisher customers, please follow this thread

I want to add a link to another (recent) thread that provides a (for some working) solution to autotrace:
 
Even though I would like to see this feature eventually being part of AD (and hopefully in a superior way) this is one of the things I for now can easily get done with other solutions. So, I do not miss it at all (in AD).
d.

Many of us in the other side are actual professionals earning money with Affinity. CURRENTLY and since long, and with the current, and past versions of AD and AP. I definitely am one. Is not like one of the sides in the debate is formed by professionals and the other isn't (that's even funny). I've recently been able to exchange work and samples with two persons (in a different community!) that had been years claiming to be super pros, and when I have been able to check stuff (and them mine), man has it been revealing. It is a very bad claim to make around here, specially as an argument in the fashion of: I am more professional than you, so I "know". Back it up with reasons , technical ones, as in any debate about tech stuff. And then we will argue with that, often the final truth staying in the middle. 
Workarounds ARE the everyday of so, so, sooo many professionals that it's not even funny. 10 companies and not only me, so many colleagues have always used workarounds, with the industry standard tools as I was even detailing in a recent post. Of course, minimizing the need of those is a must. I have never been against the implementation of these two features. Indeed, I'd say there are a few that are also pending, very important, in the Affinity apps (I'd love some added and other fixed in the Adobe and Autodesk ones too, BTW. Since many years).
About the focus on digital painters... don't get me started. They have worked great there, but what they have addressed are some features and bugs in the very basic brush system in Photo, but photo retouch field does need to have a flawless brush for so many operations (ask any high end pro working editing magazine covers of studio photos of very high end level. And all use tablets). And the tablet precision issues was affecting even making a lasso for any operation (freaking dented contours!), so commonly used in image editing / photo retouch. Selections and masks are the soul of photo retouch, had to make a lot of  that at many jobs. That's heavily more in the land of photography than in digital painting. Digital painters are also professionals, when they do it professionally, BTW.
Designer now needs some love. YEP!!! Absolutely. In my hands at least, is proven to be EXTREMELY efficient. Maybe I am a more experience professional, then. Still, by no means this is to say that adding these features (and fixing some problems) is not of critical importance. Should surely be on the top of the list. So... we are agreeing in everything? NOPE. The harsh criticism without knowing what is happening there internally, neither considering the tools' price, the tone, is with what I can never agree. Also, as just mentioned, what is the point ? Generating animosity in a certain matter/feature is only going to make them have a less positive attitude in adding it. And they'll act as professionals, but we are all human, and motivation plays a big role.
Another thing I don't get to understand is :  If for many, the difference on behavior, quality, industry standards, logo, and whatever, is so much better with Adobe, what is their point in being YEARS waiting around here for a feature ? I mean, they clearly DO NOT love these apps, or adore Adobe's in comparison, why then don't just use Adobe suite? Isn't it then a huge waste of their professional time ? And time is money. To me it is. Is it because the company they work at pays the subscription but they are not willing to pay from own pockets one for home? If so, they should admit that honestly and how if being so, they depend on Serif. Or... just be fully coherent, and simply pay with your own money 60 bucks per month (and whatever it increases to be in the future) for the Adobe suite subscription.
I would TOTALLY agree with criticism here, in that the features must be added. Heck, while doing projects, I've seen me wishing to have to make less "jumps", even if I do that at the speed of light. But the tone, borderline with insults at times, is IMO what removes relevance to the conversation. Because they haven't added this or that, then they ARE this or that (insert here whatever insult or disqualification), is the wrong point of the whole thing, even if the technical points were pretty valid and solid till that moment. Same with insulting users calling  them unprofessional (while a real comparison of skills and experience might end up being super funny, with some...)
I HOPE distort (even if perspective is added later, as you can deal with distort) and warp are implemented the earlier possible. But we don't want it done like a faulty outline stroke. They make the right call if don't add a feature in a poor way (seems the reason why they don't add a vectorizer), but only if they are sure they can implement something  solid. I'm not in the other band in these, but absolutely against the tone, manners (of some, not all), and disqualifications/insults directed to the company. 

One I did today

Click here to download the latest beta
Status: Customer Beta
Purpose: Features, Improvements, Fixes
Requirements: A valid product key (for Affinity Store purchases), or an installation of the full retail version from the Microsoft Store

As this is a beta it is considered to be not suitable for production use. This means that you should not attempt to use it for commercial purposes or for any other activity that may be adversely affected by the application failing, including the total loss of any documents. We hope you enjoy the latest build, and as always, if you've got any problems, please don't hesitate to post a new thread in this forum and we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Thanks once again for your continued feedback. 

If you have a general question about the software, please head over to the Questions Forum, or if you have any suggestions, please head over to the Feature Requests forum.
Fixes
Fixed grids failing to display correctly on Artboards Improved Crop tool handle hit testing (for narrow shapes) Added Stock Panel to Pixel Persona Fixed vector export giving incorrect results with strokes which must expand Fixed incorrect boolean operation functionality on open curves Fixed long history rows expanding too wide, making alternative futures button to disappear Added a new preference to control whether documents open in the current active window group Fixed new documents starting minimised (when previous document was minimised) Fixed crash on startup when broken fonts are installed Fixed occasional problems with replacing document fonts with their installed equivalent Fixed dashed lines not printing consistently across various printers  Fixed stroke width being printed incorrectly on rotated objects  Fixed mouse getting locked into straight line mode after using a pen and ALT key Fixed expanding linestyles which have a brush applied and variable pressure profile Removed limit on favourite fonts Fixed Studio panels being wrong size after reset  Fixed the item name dialog not focusing the text box by default Fixed the active document not always being shown on the document panel 1.8.0.526 release notes

Click here to download the latest beta
Status: Customer Beta
Purpose: Fixes
Requirements: A valid product key (for Affinity Store purchases), or an installation of the full retail version from the Microsoft Store

As this is a beta it is considered to be not suitable for production use. This means that you should not attempt to use it for commercial purposes or for any other activity that may be adversely affected by the application failing, including the total loss of any documents. We hope you enjoy the latest build, and as always, if you've got any problems, please don't hesitate to post a new thread in this forum and we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Thanks once again for your continued feedback. 

If you have a general question about the software, please head over to the Questions Forum, or if you have any suggestions, please head over to the Feature Requests forum.
Fixes
Added vertical scrollers and I-beam cursor to Metadata panel Added support for IPTC Genre, Subject Codes and Scenes  Added support for XMP sidecar metadata Changed Lens correction to no longer show a list of possible lens names when it can't disambiguate Added lens profile: Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX II  Fixed Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD G2 A025 automatic profile lookup failing Fixed Tamron 28-300m f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD (A010) not being identified Fixed smart selection brush crash  Fixed long macro names wrapping onto multiple lines  Fixed long history rows expanding too wide, making alternative futures button to disappear Added a new preference to control whether documents open in the current active window group Fixed new documents starting minimised (when previous document was minimised) Fixed crash on startup when broken fonts are installed Fixed occasional problems with replacing document fonts with their installed equivalent Fixed dashed lines not printing consistently across various printers  Fixed stroke width being printed incorrectly on rotated objects  Fixed mouse getting locked into straight line mode after using a pen and ALT key Fixed expanding linestyles which have a brush applied and variable pressure profile Removed limit on favourite fonts Fixed Studio panels being wrong size after reset  Fixed the item name dialog not focusing the text box by default Fixed the active document not always being shown on the document panel 1.8.0.526 release notes

Muchas gracias!! Es Oro! Estoy empezando con este prog y me será de mucha ayuda.

Um…that's what user forums are.
Nonsense. The former in no way implies the latter. And the contrary is more often demonstrated in this forum than in any other software user forum in which I participate. But there's no need for the company's developers to answer each and every repetitive rant.
And you said "either…", which implies an "or…", which you did not provide. So I will:
...or the Affinity team (i.e., the privately owned company) is following the development path (priorities and sequence) which makes most senses for its (not your; not my) product development, and has neither time for, nor interest in, listening to a bunch of repetitive, rude, insulting immature rants from self-proclaimed 'professionals' convinced that their personal pet peeve is always the one upon which the future of the graphics world pivots, and that everyone else is an amateurish dolt.
JET

In this world we tend to give too much importance to the instrument, it is more important than professional that the man who uses it.
In over thirty years of work I have had the opportunity to see many people, really professional, who brought out splendid works from simple tools.
Often, very simple software from small software houses have the ability to solve specific tasks because they focus only on these while larger software must necessarily be generalists.
In the Adobe family, plug-ins have multiplied that had very specific specific qualities ... and as SrPx often writes, if you turn to the world of "3D" you will find out how many things change and change continuously, the rendering engines to give an example typical.
I understand that for many to scream or fear a non-professionalism of Serif's tools is a way to stimulate them, but I would prefer that the implementation of new utilities corresponds with the quality of the same.
Distortions, Warp and Perspectives are very useful but too often low quality tools, I prefer to work by hand until I find something that does it equally well.
In Affinity there are many tools that need to be improved, see the stroke expansion, which I frankly prefer to wait for than having a tool that works badly.
In the meantime, I discovered that Affinity has solved so many important things to me compared to my normal workflow, so much so that I have definitively abandoned Adobe after more than thirty years of loyalty.

Status: Beta
Purpose: Stability and General Testing
Requirements: Purchased Affinity Publisher
Windows Store: Not submitted
Download: Download
Auto-update: Not Available
---
Hi,
We are pleased to announce that a new Customer Beta of Affinity Publisher (1.8.0.535) is now available as a download from the link above.
As this is a 'Stability and General Testing' beta it is considered to be not suitable for production use. This means that you should not attempt to use it for commercial purposes or for any other activity where you may be adversely affected by the application failing, including the total loss of any documents. 
We hope you enjoy the beta, and as always, if you've got any problems installing or running up, please don't hesitate to post in this thread. 
Any problems actually using this version please make a new topic in this forum and we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Please feel free to leave general suggestions and comments in the Discussion Forum. 
Many thanks for your continued feedback.
---
Fixes and Updates
General
Fix for crash on startup when specific (broken) fonts are installed
Embedded Assets imported from opened files aren't always visible initially
Fixed sporadic crash switching from the Text Flow Tool to the Move Tool
Prevented opening of multiple copies of placed linked documents
Fix for documents not auto-updating when edited from inside the application
(Mac) Fixed crash Adding Pages from File
Page Management
Master Page text  could be duplicated when migrating masters
IME panel now available in detached Master Text Frames
IDML Import
Sporadic crash opening IDML with Drop Cap paragraph styles.
Use document profile when IDML contains an image profile of 'None'
Text Variables converted to plain text when importing IDML
Text
(Mac) Fix for crashing in the Text Style Editor (hopefully!)
Improved Title Exceptions granularity to never change certain words
Fixed text drag drop for Master Page text frames
Improved adjustment of last Table Row height / Column width 
Indexes
Words containing index marks could not always be found
Preflight
Added 'Warning' state to preflight status indicator
Additional Hyperlink checks
Overflow text check sometimes wasn't reported if the page frame was overflowing but the master frame wasn't
Ignore small images for non-proportional scaling warning
Export
Fixed PSD Export of Master Page content
Linked sRGB document not printing correctly when placed in a greyscale document
Updated Help and Translations
---
To be notified about all future Windows beta updates, please follow this notification thread 
To be notified when this Publisher update comes out of beta and is fully released to all Publisher customers, please follow this thread

Many of us in the other side are actual professionals earning money with Affinity. CURRENTLY and since long, and with the current, and past versions of AD and AP. I definitely am one. Is not like one of the sides in the debate is formed by professionals and the other isn't (that's even funny). I've recently been able to exchange work and samples with two persons (in a different community!) that had been years claiming to be super pros, and when I have been able to check stuff (and them mine), man has it been revealing. It is a very bad claim to make around here, specially as an argument in the fashion of: I am more professional than you, so I "know". Back it up with reasons , technical ones, as in any debate about tech stuff. And then we will argue with that, often the final truth staying in the middle. 
Workarounds ARE the everyday of so, so, sooo many professionals that it's not even funny. 10 companies and not only me, so many colleagues have always used workarounds, with the industry standard tools as I was even detailing in a recent post. Of course, minimizing the need of those is a must. I have never been against the implementation of these two features. Indeed, I'd say there are a few that are also pending, very important, in the Affinity apps (I'd love some added and other fixed in the Adobe and Autodesk ones too, BTW. Since many years).
About the focus on digital painters... don't get me started. They have worked great there, but what they have addressed are some features and bugs in the very basic brush system in Photo, but photo retouch field does need to have a flawless brush for so many operations (ask any high end pro working editing magazine covers of studio photos of very high end level. And all use tablets). And the tablet precision issues was affecting even making a lasso for any operation (freaking dented contours!), so commonly used in image editing / photo retouch. Selections and masks are the soul of photo retouch, had to make a lot of  that at many jobs. That's heavily more in the land of photography than in digital painting. Digital painters are also professionals, when they do it professionally, BTW.
Designer now needs some love. YEP!!! Absolutely. In my hands at least, is proven to be EXTREMELY efficient. Maybe I am a more experience professional, then. Still, by no means this is to say that adding these features (and fixing some problems) is not of critical importance. Should surely be on the top of the list. So... we are agreeing in everything? NOPE. The harsh criticism without knowing what is happening there internally, neither considering the tools' price, the tone, is with what I can never agree. Also, as just mentioned, what is the point ? Generating animosity in a certain matter/feature is only going to make them have a less positive attitude in adding it. And they'll act as professionals, but we are all human, and motivation plays a big role.
Another thing I don't get to understand is :  If for many, the difference on behavior, quality, industry standards, logo, and whatever, is so much better with Adobe, what is their point in being YEARS waiting around here for a feature ? I mean, they clearly DO NOT love these apps, or adore Adobe's in comparison, why then don't just use Adobe suite? Isn't it then a huge waste of their professional time ? And time is money. To me it is. Is it because the company they work at pays the subscription but they are not willing to pay from own pockets one for home? If so, they should admit that honestly and how if being so, they depend on Serif. Or... just be fully coherent, and simply pay with your own money 60 bucks per month (and whatever it increases to be in the future) for the Adobe suite subscription.
I would TOTALLY agree with criticism here, in that the features must be added. Heck, while doing projects, I've seen me wishing to have to make less "jumps", even if I do that at the speed of light. But the tone, borderline with insults at times, is IMO what removes relevance to the conversation. Because they haven't added this or that, then they ARE this or that (insert here whatever insult or disqualification), is the wrong point of the whole thing, even if the technical points were pretty valid and solid till that moment. Same with insulting users calling  them unprofessional (while a real comparison of skills and experience might end up being super funny, with some...)
I HOPE distort (even if perspective is added later, as you can deal with distort) and warp are implemented the earlier possible. But we don't want it done like a faulty outline stroke. They make the right call if don't add a feature in a poor way (seems the reason why they don't add a vectorizer), but only if they are sure they can implement something  solid. I'm not in the other band in these, but absolutely against the tone, manners (of some, not all), and disqualifications/insults directed to the company. 

Many of us in the other side are actual professionals earning money with Affinity. CURRENTLY and since long, and with the current, and past versions of AD and AP. I definitely am one. Is not like one of the sides in the debate is formed by professionals and the other isn't (that's even funny). I've recently been able to exchange work and samples with two persons (in a different community!) that had been years claiming to be super pros, and when I have been able to check stuff (and them mine), man has it been revealing. It is a very bad claim to make around here, specially as an argument in the fashion of: I am more professional than you, so I "know". Back it up with reasons , technical ones, as in any debate about tech stuff. And then we will argue with that, often the final truth staying in the middle. 
Workarounds ARE the everyday of so, so, sooo many professionals that it's not even funny. 10 companies and not only me, so many colleagues have always used workarounds, with the industry standard tools as I was even detailing in a recent post. Of course, minimizing the need of those is a must. I have never been against the implementation of these two features. Indeed, I'd say there are a few that are also pending, very important, in the Affinity apps (I'd love some added and other fixed in the Adobe and Autodesk ones too, BTW. Since many years).
About the focus on digital painters... don't get me started. They have worked great there, but what they have addressed are some features and bugs in the very basic brush system in Photo, but photo retouch field does need to have a flawless brush for so many operations (ask any high end pro working editing magazine covers of studio photos of very high end level. And all use tablets). And the tablet precision issues was affecting even making a lasso for any operation (freaking dented contours!), so commonly used in image editing / photo retouch. Selections and masks are the soul of photo retouch, had to make a lot of  that at many jobs. That's heavily more in the land of photography than in digital painting. Digital painters are also professionals, when they do it professionally, BTW.
Designer now needs some love. YEP!!! Absolutely. In my hands at least, is proven to be EXTREMELY efficient. Maybe I am a more experience professional, then. Still, by no means this is to say that adding these features (and fixing some problems) is not of critical importance. Should surely be on the top of the list. So... we are agreeing in everything? NOPE. The harsh criticism without knowing what is happening there internally, neither considering the tools' price, the tone, is with what I can never agree. Also, as just mentioned, what is the point ? Generating animosity in a certain matter/feature is only going to make them have a less positive attitude in adding it. And they'll act as professionals, but we are all human, and motivation plays a big role.
Another thing I don't get to understand is :  If for many, the difference on behavior, quality, industry standards, logo, and whatever, is so much better with Adobe, what is their point in being YEARS waiting around here for a feature ? I mean, they clearly DO NOT love these apps, or adore Adobe's in comparison, why then don't just use Adobe suite? Isn't it then a huge waste of their professional time ? And time is money. To me it is. Is it because the company they work at pays the subscription but they are not willing to pay from own pockets one for home? If so, they should admit that honestly and how if being so, they depend on Serif. Or... just be fully coherent, and simply pay with your own money 60 bucks per month (and whatever it increases to be in the future) for the Adobe suite subscription.
I would TOTALLY agree with criticism here, in that the features must be added. Heck, while doing projects, I've seen me wishing to have to make less "jumps", even if I do that at the speed of light. But the tone, borderline with insults at times, is IMO what removes relevance to the conversation. Because they haven't added this or that, then they ARE this or that (insert here whatever insult or disqualification), is the wrong point of the whole thing, even if the technical points were pretty valid and solid till that moment. Same with insulting users calling  them unprofessional (while a real comparison of skills and experience might end up being super funny, with some...)
I HOPE distort (even if perspective is added later, as you can deal with distort) and warp are implemented the earlier possible. But we don't want it done like a faulty outline stroke. They make the right call if don't add a feature in a poor way (seems the reason why they don't add a vectorizer), but only if they are sure they can implement something  solid. I'm not in the other band in these, but absolutely against the tone, manners (of some, not all), and disqualifications/insults directed to the company. 

Many of us in the other side are actual professionals earning money with Affinity. CURRENTLY and since long, and with the current, and past versions of AD and AP. I definitely am one. Is not like one of the sides in the debate is formed by professionals and the other isn't (that's even funny). I've recently been able to exchange work and samples with two persons (in a different community!) that had been years claiming to be super pros, and when I have been able to check stuff (and them mine), man has it been revealing. It is a very bad claim to make around here, specially as an argument in the fashion of: I am more professional than you, so I "know". Back it up with reasons , technical ones, as in any debate about tech stuff. And then we will argue with that, often the final truth staying in the middle. 
Workarounds ARE the everyday of so, so, sooo many professionals that it's not even funny. 10 companies and not only me, so many colleagues have always used workarounds, with the industry standard tools as I was even detailing in a recent post. Of course, minimizing the need of those is a must. I have never been against the implementation of these two features. Indeed, I'd say there are a few that are also pending, very important, in the Affinity apps (I'd love some added and other fixed in the Adobe and Autodesk ones too, BTW. Since many years).
About the focus on digital painters... don't get me started. They have worked great there, but what they have addressed are some features and bugs in the very basic brush system in Photo, but photo retouch field does need to have a flawless brush for so many operations (ask any high end pro working editing magazine covers of studio photos of very high end level. And all use tablets). And the tablet precision issues was affecting even making a lasso for any operation (freaking dented contours!), so commonly used in image editing / photo retouch. Selections and masks are the soul of photo retouch, had to make a lot of  that at many jobs. That's heavily more in the land of photography than in digital painting. Digital painters are also professionals, when they do it professionally, BTW.
Designer now needs some love. YEP!!! Absolutely. In my hands at least, is proven to be EXTREMELY efficient. Maybe I am a more experience professional, then. Still, by no means this is to say that adding these features (and fixing some problems) is not of critical importance. Should surely be on the top of the list. So... we are agreeing in everything? NOPE. The harsh criticism without knowing what is happening there internally, neither considering the tools' price, the tone, is with what I can never agree. Also, as just mentioned, what is the point ? Generating animosity in a certain matter/feature is only going to make them have a less positive attitude in adding it. And they'll act as professionals, but we are all human, and motivation plays a big role.
Another thing I don't get to understand is :  If for many, the difference on behavior, quality, industry standards, logo, and whatever, is so much better with Adobe, what is their point in being YEARS waiting around here for a feature ? I mean, they clearly DO NOT love these apps, or adore Adobe's in comparison, why then don't just use Adobe suite? Isn't it then a huge waste of their professional time ? And time is money. To me it is. Is it because the company they work at pays the subscription but they are not willing to pay from own pockets one for home? If so, they should admit that honestly and how if being so, they depend on Serif. Or... just be fully coherent, and simply pay with your own money 60 bucks per month (and whatever it increases to be in the future) for the Adobe suite subscription.
I would TOTALLY agree with criticism here, in that the features must be added. Heck, while doing projects, I've seen me wishing to have to make less "jumps", even if I do that at the speed of light. But the tone, borderline with insults at times, is IMO what removes relevance to the conversation. Because they haven't added this or that, then they ARE this or that (insert here whatever insult or disqualification), is the wrong point of the whole thing, even if the technical points were pretty valid and solid till that moment. Same with insulting users calling  them unprofessional (while a real comparison of skills and experience might end up being super funny, with some...)
I HOPE distort (even if perspective is added later, as you can deal with distort) and warp are implemented the earlier possible. But we don't want it done like a faulty outline stroke. They make the right call if don't add a feature in a poor way (seems the reason why they don't add a vectorizer), but only if they are sure they can implement something  solid. I'm not in the other band in these, but absolutely against the tone, manners (of some, not all), and disqualifications/insults directed to the company. 

Many of us in the other side are actual professionals earning money with Affinity. CURRENTLY and since long, and with the current, and past versions of AD and AP. I definitely am one. Is not like one of the sides in the debate is formed by professionals and the other isn't (that's even funny). I've recently been able to exchange work and samples with two persons (in a different community!) that had been years claiming to be super pros, and when I have been able to check stuff (and them mine), man has it been revealing. It is a very bad claim to make around here, specially as an argument in the fashion of: I am more professional than you, so I "know". Back it up with reasons , technical ones, as in any debate about tech stuff. And then we will argue with that, often the final truth staying in the middle. 
Workarounds ARE the everyday of so, so, sooo many professionals that it's not even funny. 10 companies and not only me, so many colleagues have always used workarounds, with the industry standard tools as I was even detailing in a recent post. Of course, minimizing the need of those is a must. I have never been against the implementation of these two features. Indeed, I'd say there are a few that are also pending, very important, in the Affinity apps (I'd love some added and other fixed in the Adobe and Autodesk ones too, BTW. Since many years).
About the focus on digital painters... don't get me started. They have worked great there, but what they have addressed are some features and bugs in the very basic brush system in Photo, but photo retouch field does need to have a flawless brush for so many operations (ask any high end pro working editing magazine covers of studio photos of very high end level. And all use tablets). And the tablet precision issues was affecting even making a lasso for any operation (freaking dented contours!), so commonly used in image editing / photo retouch. Selections and masks are the soul of photo retouch, had to make a lot of  that at many jobs. That's heavily more in the land of photography than in digital painting. Digital painters are also professionals, when they do it professionally, BTW.
Designer now needs some love. YEP!!! Absolutely. In my hands at least, is proven to be EXTREMELY efficient. Maybe I am a more experience professional, then. Still, by no means this is to say that adding these features (and fixing some problems) is not of critical importance. Should surely be on the top of the list. So... we are agreeing in everything? NOPE. The harsh criticism without knowing what is happening there internally, neither considering the tools' price, the tone, is with what I can never agree. Also, as just mentioned, what is the point ? Generating animosity in a certain matter/feature is only going to make them have a less positive attitude in adding it. And they'll act as professionals, but we are all human, and motivation plays a big role.
Another thing I don't get to understand is :  If for many, the difference on behavior, quality, industry standards, logo, and whatever, is so much better with Adobe, what is their point in being YEARS waiting around here for a feature ? I mean, they clearly DO NOT love these apps, or adore Adobe's in comparison, why then don't just use Adobe suite? Isn't it then a huge waste of their professional time ? And time is money. To me it is. Is it because the company they work at pays the subscription but they are not willing to pay from own pockets one for home? If so, they should admit that honestly and how if being so, they depend on Serif. Or... just be fully coherent, and simply pay with your own money 60 bucks per month (and whatever it increases to be in the future) for the Adobe suite subscription.
I would TOTALLY agree with criticism here, in that the features must be added. Heck, while doing projects, I've seen me wishing to have to make less "jumps", even if I do that at the speed of light. But the tone, borderline with insults at times, is IMO what removes relevance to the conversation. Because they haven't added this or that, then they ARE this or that (insert here whatever insult or disqualification), is the wrong point of the whole thing, even if the technical points were pretty valid and solid till that moment. Same with insulting users calling  them unprofessional (while a real comparison of skills and experience might end up being super funny, with some...)
I HOPE distort (even if perspective is added later, as you can deal with distort) and warp are implemented the earlier possible. But we don't want it done like a faulty outline stroke. They make the right call if don't add a feature in a poor way (seems the reason why they don't add a vectorizer), but only if they are sure they can implement something  solid. I'm not in the other band in these, but absolutely against the tone, manners (of some, not all), and disqualifications/insults directed to the company.