NobleValerian

A year, at least, for this issue.  It's always a little disheartening when something so basic goes for so long without being added.  I've recently started having a need for editing and creating PDFs, too.  Adobe generally makes this expensive, or incredibly frustrating.
I can more or less alter existing PDFs with DeftPDF, but it's also really unpleasant to use.
It's even more disheartening when a free program can do things the paid Affinity apps can't...
I've found that I can layout and design the PDF in Affinity, export the page (pages) as a PNG, then set it (them) as a background image behind everything in LibreOffice Writer, exactly sized to fill the page and perfectly positioned edge to edge.
Then, in Writer I can place all the fillable forms boxes and buttons on top of my design.  If I take good notes about where I positioned guides and elements with their sizes in Affinity, then I can specifically size and position all those elements in Writer absolutely perfectly.
It's certainly not ideal, but it works.  You could also just build out your fillable PDF in Writer... again, for free.  Free PDF viewers open up the exported PDF no problem, and let you fill it out.

(LibreOffice Draw can import PDFs to let you edit them, but this is incredibly frustrating both in terms of how well it imports elements, and using the tools to make changes.)

Clearly, Serif could care less, but was frustrated enough today about still not having this to want to post a little reminder.  People still want this.  I'm struggling to believe this is such a difficult thing to implement, but whatever.

Clearly, Serif could care less, but was frustrated enough today about still not having this to want to post a little reminder.  People still want this.  I'm struggling to believe this is such a difficult thing to implement, but whatever.

Clearly, Serif could care less, but was frustrated enough today about still not having this to want to post a little reminder.  People still want this.  I'm struggling to believe this is such a difficult thing to implement, but whatever.

Gotta love those power users who recommend accepting the not-quite-right work around instead of encouraging a more appropriate feature be added.  -.-  The "New Stack" is better than nothing, but I agree with Patrick.  A simple checkbox or feature to import the stack without doing anything extra would be better.  And a reasonable request.  Not worrying about lost time in a professional (or personal environment) is not a reasonable request.  There's no way to replenish that little commodity.

Gotta love those power users who recommend accepting the not-quite-right work around instead of encouraging a more appropriate feature be added.  -.-  The "New Stack" is better than nothing, but I agree with Patrick.  A simple checkbox or feature to import the stack without doing anything extra would be better.  And a reasonable request.  Not worrying about lost time in a professional (or personal environment) is not a reasonable request.  There's no way to replenish that little commodity.

Just had the same experience.  It's frustrating to have to set everything up *again*.

Try using a feather or refine edge.I think you may want to do feather in your case since it's a UI design; use a small feather, like 2px. I assume the problem that your getting (since this is a UI design) is that your cubes and boxes and whatnot have anti-aliasing, which kind of blurs the edges.  So maybe try to include those blurry bits in your selection, too. 
 
Are you using flow 100% and opacity 100% on your brush when your painting it in on the layer with the hue blend mode? The hue should change perfectly to whatever color your using. 
 
But yes, this method does not change the lightness; it only really changes the hue. If you wanted to change lightness, too, then make a selection and just start painting, no layer blend mode or anything. Or just use shift + f5 to fill instead of having to use the paint brush. The trick is that your selection has to be really good in that it is softer around the aliased areas by just the right amount. This is really difficult to achieve... you need to find just the right feather amount.
 
Photoshop's "Replace Color" dialogue would solve all of your issues; it makes the "feathered" selection that you need and then can force the color replacement as you wish. Affinity Photo really needs to add this tool: 

 
You can click on that "result" and it pops up with a color dialogue, where you can paste in your hexadecimal. Affinity Photo does not have "Replace Color" and, as far as I know, neither Photoshop nor Affinity Photo have a brush-tool that preserves lightness like you described. Affinity Photo and Photoshop both have their positives and negatives. One of Affinity Photo's huge negatives (for me and, evidently, for you too) is that they failed to add in the darn "Replace Color" tool. As a product photographer, I really need this Replace Color tool for setting parts of products to particular colors. Hopefully it gets to the devs of Affinity Photo that they really really should add this feature. 

When I save a style, it doesn't get reapplied the same way it was saved.
I wouldn't say it's random, but it's certainly not consistent with expectations.  It looks like it might be based on the size of the object/layer it is being applied to.
For instance, I saved this Bevel/Emboss effect with a Radius of 10 px.  It shows pixels as the default measurement, and I chose a pixel radius (important because it does not show a percentage value by default, so it shouldn't apply a percentage value by default).  When I apply this style in other places, it's all over the place.  It's usually a decimal, 19.1, 15.7, 12.3, 3.1.  That leads me to believe it's making bad assumptions based on a percentage of some irrelevant thing.
I would expect when I save a value, that value should be applied.  In my case, the value I set is the right value in the several places I need to use the style.  However, I need to open up the effect and reset the value almost every place I apply it, because Photo arbitrarily changes the value.  I've tried this with the "Scale with Object" box checked and unchecked, and it screws with the value either way.  If there's a setting to prevent this behavior, I don't know where it is, but I would also call it a bug for this to be set as a default behavior.

Affected Version: 1.7.1
I tried to reproduce some photoshop styles I used to color smoke like fire.
This actually works quite well.
The issue here is that I cannot distinguish between the several styles I have created, as the previews in the styles panel is empty.
Screenshot: There are actually 18 styles in the selected category, all selectable through a transparent square that hightlights blue when clicked.

Is it the default position of an Affinity moderator to address an issue with close-minded disregard?  There are obviously situations where a UI can reset without being reset manually.  I work in a digital arts lab where the computers automatically reset after every shut down, and every time the students come back it's like the software was opened for the first time.  I'm not IT, and I'm not the only Instructor, I don't have the option to go in and set things however I want for every computer, so saving workspaces would be invaluable.  And as already mentioned, many users prefer different workspaces for different workflows.  The default layout is cluttered for a new user, and we don't need all the same tools and settings in all projects.  So, there are *several* reasons for having the option to save a UI setup.

Exactly, this.  I'm creating an installer for a 2D game and it requires .bmp.  It's all challenging enough without having to stop what I'm doing because some old standard [obviously still being used] isn't supported by Affinity.

Considering how unreliable/unsafe free software can be, I don't want to have to worry about some random software with the potential for malware and corruption because Affinity isn't interested in doing something simple enough that "plenty of free tools" are giving it away at no cost.  Especially when a well known competitor on the market is capable of doing it.

I suppose saying it's not a priority irritates the $&@% out of me because, it's sort of obvious the feature you haven't included isn't a priority.  Also, the point of requesting a feature is to suggest that it's priority level should maybe trend in an upward direction.

BTW, I already owned Sketchbook Pro which is capable of exporting to bmp, and Krita (free) is also capable of exporting to bmp.

Exactly, this.  I'm creating an installer for a 2D game and it requires .bmp.  It's all challenging enough without having to stop what I'm doing because some old standard [obviously still being used] isn't supported by Affinity.

Considering how unreliable/unsafe free software can be, I don't want to have to worry about some random software with the potential for malware and corruption because Affinity isn't interested in doing something simple enough that "plenty of free tools" are giving it away at no cost.  Especially when a well known competitor on the market is capable of doing it.

I suppose saying it's not a priority irritates the $&@% out of me because, it's sort of obvious the feature you haven't included isn't a priority.  Also, the point of requesting a feature is to suggest that it's priority level should maybe trend in an upward direction.

BTW, I already owned Sketchbook Pro which is capable of exporting to bmp, and Krita (free) is also capable of exporting to bmp.

I would also like the option to export .bmp!! I use AP to develop automation graphics for industrial process control systems and several of the industrial displays (e.g. automation direct) will only accept bmp as a file source. I get by converting with paintbrush, but would love to eliminate the extra step.  

I would also like the option to export .bmp. Pretty much exactly like on photoshop where I can chose halftones and lines per inch etc.
 
As a screen printer I occasionally need to print out halftones and don't want to pay the $100's of dollars for a rip to use a couple of times a year.

I would think people need .bmp because target application. While you can tile any pixel file, some applications for example in game design need .bmp.

I would like to requestBMP filesupport . I work al lot with digital music instruments (like yamaha clavinona/ yamaha tyros etc.). These instrument can only display graphics inBMP format. But Affinity cant exportBMP format.

I am stuck on this as well, having to resort to other tools to generate the BMP. Many things still require files in BMP format which cannot be avoided.

I would like the BMP export feature also. As it is I now have to use Pixelmator to do this whereas I had hoped BMP which is a standard format, would have been available in Affinity. I left PS for Pixelmator and then Pixelmator to Affinity. Whilst there is no BMP export option, I'll have to stick with Pixelmator to do those conversions (which is a shame).
 
I need BMP because I have some hardware that uses BMP images in the icons.

I need to export to .bmp also in varying color depths from very simple 16 colors to 32 bit.
 
please add this feature soon. Thank you.

I'd really like .bmp support too.
 
Ken,
What I'm doing for now is using the free Paintbrush App:
http://paintbrush.sourceforge.net/
It's old and hasn't been updated in a while, but it works.
 
Export from Affinity (8 bit tiff), then open and save in Paintbrush.
 
It's a hassle, but doesn't require PhotoShop

I would also like to do this. And to easily create a bitmap (b&w) image from a grayscale.

In my line of work it is essential that I am able to export my images to 8 bit .BMP  Is it possible that this option may be added, or is there a simple alternative....without resorting to PhotoShop?

I agree, lots of opportunity for improvement for the grid manager, and especially the guides manager.

Photoshop artist with 20 years of experience here. I'm really trying to like Affinity. But this is a deal breaker for me. Suggesting that this is a useless feature is truly remarkable.
 
I work on about 10 different types of projects.
 
Sometimes I'm painting with a nearly blank canvas. Other times I'm doing film poster work with a few dozen masks.  Other times I'm doing model photo retouching.  Some documents have 200 layers and dozens of effects. Others require as much screen real estate as possible. I have different UI setups for everything. 
 
Anyone who thinks this is a matter of "not resetting" from the last setup is frankly missing the point. This is about versatility.
 
If you want to create a work environment that matches the dozens of ways people make images, you need a workspace that reflects that.
 
This is a major limitation of Affinity.