adrm

I have decided to just wait and see what happens but I  will not be building the new business that I  have been wanting  to do  I  think that this will could go like Xara/Magix
They still sell their Designer pro non subscription but you if you don't  get the subscription  there is no assets in the designs  gallery  so no templates no smart shapes just imagine Affinity designer with only squares and ellipses  and everything else behind that subscription pay wall  then next to go wad the Xara Xone a teaching and resource site it was scrapped and the community tutorials put behind a ridiculous site that you can't search and no one uses any more and nothing new was ever  added again
Then the Magix crapp software that was cobbled on to the Xara software 
I  switched to Affinity once I  could run it on my Pc to to get away  from all of that  was happy and enjoyed Affinity apps   now here we go again
So  I  will wait and see if serif/ canva  prove me wrong  I hope they do 
 
 

Hey folks I need a hairline stroke function in Affinity designer- And if I ask the internet about it . . . not just only me is missing this "small" feature.
It is a defined line (.pdf / postscricpt,...) for practical and professional work. For me I need it because I need a CutContour for a Plotter. 
I also do a lot with lasercutting and here is a hairline also a nice feature. I also think that it is interesting with the dxf and dwg files -> A lot of CAD files contains hair lines. I work mostly with Rhino in CAD an also uses hairline strokes here. 

Please make it possible. - thanks!
here is a link to an older topic:
 
 

My work is mostly made of tables. I think that most technical and scientific books are made of tables. It's a sad reality that we technical and scientifc writers are cut out of Publisher (not only because of the lack of tables, but this is one of the most important omissions).
So, yes, I add my vote for better tables.
Paolo
 

I totally understand everyone's frustration with tables. At my work I need tables on a regular basis and they are a pita. Dear Serif, rethink your priorities on what basics are to a layout application, don't waste your time on fancy features anymore you drop after a while. I even made my peace with the clumsy colour organisation, but TABLES? Tables are basic. Please.

Please re-evaluate table improvements

Grumpy grandad in:
First; I love Affinity's apps. I'm a total evangelist and convinced a lot of customers and colleagues to purchase it. I have been a "Affinitier" since 2015 and I won't go back. So please, don't take this as a free light ranting.
I'm tired. I'm frustrated. Because of tables. And I have been this way since Publisher came out. I can't understand by Affinity decided to make tables as a separate monolithic object only.
Why, in the name of the design gods, they decided to make it like something outside of the text (Something that even the cheapest, crappiest text editor app understand).
Why, in the name of the design hell's lord they decided that tables can't spread through text containers, columns and pages.
Why, in the name of sanity, can't we set a fixed width to a table, or set fixed width to a column, or block the width to prevent Publisher resizing them whenever I move any other single column, making a nightmare to set the table layout.
I'm tired. This is the single cause of friction and discussion inside out studio team. This is the cause of delays and multiple errors on our work. It is the cause that we have started to make tables in a larger document apart so we can work with big tables before segmenting them to be placed into the final layout. This is why we fear to add or move any design element, because the hideous tables will no spread or move correctly in the documents breaking all the text workflow. This is why we fear to modify a table layout, because we will have to do it on all the segments of the table.
Our last work toke 4 extra hours just because of the tables. Because of the need to segment it and re-layout it after any document modification. And that's 4 hours I can't pass onto the customer because is not their fault.
In 2019, Affinity recognized that this was a very requested feature. Now we are in 2023, and that forum post is deep under into the vault of the lost threads. But we still have to design tables with virtual scissors and glue.
Publisher v2 has been a great improvement on a lot of things, but this table thing is outrageous, and just now, in the middle of a urgent complex corporate document full of tables, it is wat is making us to be working on Sunday instead of walking the dog in the countryside.
I don't know what more to say. I wish Affinity to tell us something more that "we know it is requested we will look into it, someday"
For all the love that I have to the team, I hate tables in Affinity. And I hate to be inside the studio trying to make tables to work on Sunday.
Grumpy grandad out.

I'm reasonably familiar with master pages, and I can't see how the master page causes what I'm seeing.
My issue is with objects (tables and images) inserted on regular document pages.

In the latest version (1.10.4.1198) I'm seeing this consistently, as demonstrated in the attached file.
Steps:
Create a new document Set up a simple master with text frames. Add some text Add a table Try to move the table into the (non-master!) text frame The table is now stuck / locked and can not be manipulated in any way.
 
Is this a bug, or am I just causing this by being inept?
Locked table - test.afpub

I've added this to the original report to the developers as there are still inconsistencies with the time it takes to autoflow the text, especially on Windows.

Having spent many hours working with AP on my new book, which will easily be several hundred pages, I find myself dusting off PagePlus and seeing whether I can do what I actually want to do. Also looking at MS Publisher.

Regardless, the request for a hairline stroke weight setting is valid. (It's been brought up before in other threads.)
For those not familiar, a hairline stroke weight always renders at the smallest width possible on the output device, be it your monitor or an imagesetter. This is advantageous when drawing paths in detailed illustrations, during which we are constantly zooming in and out. Having stroke weight set to hairline feels more precise and is less distracting because the stroke weight is always drawn the same, regardless of zoom. The extreme zooming capabilities of Affinity as compared to other programs buttresses the point.
It's a great feature, a standard setting in PostScript, and it should be provided in every vector drawing software.
JET

I know this is an old post, but I would like to add my vote for this feature.
Setting the line thickness to something really small works for laser engraving, but then it makes it hard to work with visually.

As it turns out, the problem was me (Of course 😀).
See this thread:
 

Hmm... I got it working again by doing Layer -> Geometry -> Separate Curves and then selecting the newly created layer containing the path I wanted to modify.
Is it supposed to work like this?
I'm willing to swear I have worked on several layers containing multiple curves all day without seeing this issue.

Hi adrm,

This will happen if the last node of the curve becomes deselected (by pressing Escape). If you hold down Ctrl it should allow you to temporarily switch to the node tool where you can select an End Node and then continue drawing your curve from there. Essentially the idea is that you can draw a separate curve object that begins in the exact same place as an existing node.
Please see the documentation here for what all the new Pen Tool icons mean and how they function:
https://affinity.help/designer/English.lproj/pages/CurvesShapes/draw_linesAndShapes.html

https://affinity.help/designer/English.lproj/pages/CurvesShapes/draw_linesAndShapes.html

In my (initial) tests, this issue is resolved in beta 1.8.2.619

This issue appears to be fixed in beta 1.8.2.169.
Thanks.

The initial test for responsiveness when manipulating pages showed terrific improvements.
 
Yay!

The initial test for responsiveness when manipulating pages showed terrific improvements.
 
Yay!

The initial test for responsiveness when manipulating pages showed terrific improvements.
 
Yay!

Hi Forum!
"Struggles" is a big understatement.
I have a document with several hundred image files probably averaging a few megabytes each (total overall of a couple gigabytes).  During the beta, I tried it first with "embedded" and then with "linked," but of course back then the "linked" feature didn't actually function, so it made no difference.  After opening the document, it would take an hour to load it up, queuing everything into RAM/virtual memory somehow, I guess, and then it would be usable, though not perfect.
 At some point the "linked" feature did begin working, and so I rebuilt my entire document with links, and that caused the document size to go down dramatically.  It did not really have the behavior that I would have hoped, however, as all the linked documents still appear to be forced to load upon opening the document.  It just was semi-sort-of-usable during the process, and also my impression is that it took longer.  I would have rather had only the images actually appearing on the screen to load.  Then, upon scrolling to a new page, bringing a new image into active view, only then it would load the full image.  It does appear that my vision was also the vision of at least part of the developer team, because if I break the links by renaming the image directory all the images show as a very low-res placeholder, and the document works great and I can edit it.  If only this vision had been fully implemented!  As it is, breaking the image links is the only way to work on the document without extreme, extreme pain -- one minute.. or multi-minute... delays... sometimes for every.... single..... mouse......... click.
As the months have gone by (yes, long term project), the performance has gotten worse.  It now really bogs down the whole computer.  (Not Responding) is its typical state.
Also it does crash hard sometimes.  I see in the FAQ that everyone knows about scrolling around crashing it, but also sometimes in Resource Manager, or just... whenever.
The most disturbing crashes are the times when I come back to the computer after it having sat overnight and the whole computer is totally unresponsive, the screen just stays black, and computer shut down is the only solution.
Also the file size has ballooned (now at 143 MB), I'm not sure why, as I haven't been adding more nor larger images, just rearranging things and making changes.  Perhaps the total file history is being saved to an extent, despite not having that checkmarked and creating new files constantly with "Save As"?  This is not a problem, I don't really care, unless it is related to the other problems.  Maybe helps you diagnose.
I have tried messing with the performance parameters.  Currently I have set:
RAM Usage Limit: 5120 MB  (The computer has 8 GB total physical RAM.  Experimented quite a bit with this and this is where it seems to work best.)
Disk Usage Warning At: 45056 MB (This seems to make absolutely no difference to anything.  Placebo?  Placeholder?  Anyway, my HD has 65 GB free currently.  Happy to free more if it would make any difference.)
Undo Limit: 121
View Quality: Nearest Neighbor (lower quality)
File recovery interval: 610 seconds
Retina Rendering: Lowest Quality (fastest)
 
Is there anything that will help me escape the torment in which I am trapped?  Even a drop of water to cool my tongue, I would so appreciate.  I see that version 1.8.0 may help stop the large complex document crashes, and so maybe it improves dealing with large documents overall, so I am going to try that now (I'm currently on 1.7.3).  I decided to post this first so that the full saga can be followed, and any other poor large-document souls might find it and know: you are not alone.

this bug can be easily found in windows version 1.8.0.585, and also found in mac version 1.8.1, hope this bug will be fix soon, now I can not draw icon in designer unless uninstall 1.8.x on both os.

I'm going to report this as a bug

I made a simple 3 page document, double spread, to play around with Sections.
I inserted the text "Chapter x" (x=1,2,3) at the top of each page to keep track of them.
I then created a section for each 'chapter', i.e. the first started on physical page 1, the next on page 2, etc
I then inserted two new pages before page 2.
The sections automatically updated and the section for "Chapter 2" now referred to physical page 4. All well and good.
Next I deleted the two new pages, i.e. physical page 2 and 3
This time around Section 2 (correctly) pointed to physical page two, but Section 3 vanished. As a result, my Chapter 2 and 3 were incorporated into Section 2. I can only imagine how this would play havoc with a lengthy document with many chapters and sections.
 
Is this how it's intended to work or a bug?