gdenby

I suppose its the quality of the vid, but I'm not seeing any transparency change. However, what is in the group? I've had a few instances where I couldn't apply transparency, evidently because something in the group or an adjustment layer would override adding transparency that was already defined.

The shapes are clean and clear. Good. My feeling is that it is visually a little top heavy. I would bring down the letters till the tail of the Q is level w. the top of the dot. Then reduce the vertical size of the rectangle w. the H in it. I think the tighter grouping would make a quick visual recognition easier. Perhaps add just a tiny bit more space between the Q and the RAJA.

Very nice. It is a very good basic level tutorial for AD. Simple and fine adjustments to built in shapes. But I think your pointers on making the design interesting are more valuable. Variable colors, internal details, shifting the elements around are things every one should know from the ground up.

Other forum members do lots more pixel work than I. You might want to look at the "Show us your work" section of the forum for samples of what can be done. Note, neither Photo or Designer are focused on being dedicated "paint" programs like Krita. But there are some good tools. I mostly do vector work, and am currently working on a 5K x 3K desktop image. I just opened it up, and added some 1 pixel wide line work to one of the vectors. I had to be zoomed in 81000% in order to make a 16 x 16 px drawing, each pixel a different color. Not even visible at 100% zoom, and only a dot at 150%. So I guess Designer nicely handles high resolution, and pixel level precision.

No automatic bitmap tracing. From other posts, it is the works, but the developers are not happy with it yet.

Crashes used to be the norm. Many were hardware related, and now mostly fixed. Hard drives were very very delicate. I had a 500 Mb HD, huge at the time, have a head crash that wiped out 6 months of work. The machine literally ripped itself to death. The various chips would overheat easily. I had to put a desk fan next to a production machine that I maintained , and instructed the users to run it during use. It was standard to save and shut down for at least 30 sec. to let the hardware cool down when programs started becoming "flakey." Crappy software just made things worse. Developers might try for a performance boost by writing to addresses that were designated for system use, but at the time not well protected. Etc. So my experience conditioned me. Save and back up. Often. By Habit. They're just machines, and programmers aren't godzzes.

Long time ago, a fellow asked on a 3D forum "How long did your render last?" Folks came back w. stuff like "I had one that took 7 days." Which was followed by "I had 1 frame that took 2 weeks" To which the OP responded, "No, you don't understand. I meant how long between crashes? My record was 9 minutes." So, yeah, I hit save every few minutes. I've never trusted either OS or app stability. Just hoped for it. I did maintain departmental files. I don't recall the software, but I set up a system that backed the databases 4 times per work day to our NAS, and then triplicated them to other storage devices. It only worked on the various desktops when they were momentarily idle. Never had anyone complain.

I pretty much have to agree w. @verysames view. Serif must maintain a core focus. Tho' obviously talented, the personnel ratio between Serif and an immense enterprise like Adobe is what, 1 to 75/100? Yes, there are lots of features that really should be implemented. But reliability is essential to production. As a side question, AD has an auto save, default every 5 minutes. Doesn't AP also?

Stop trying to draw a line. its obviously impossible. )-:

Substantial review. I really like the portions about file format philosophy. I worked in a fine art museum for 40 years. The goal was to keep both the object perfectly intact for 500 years, and the documentation. Non-proprietary formats are crucial for data storage. The Affinity line does appear to "play nice," as you say. Tho' even .tif(f) is not quite reliable.

Here's a work around that might be useful. W. snapping on, draw a rectangle between the two object which snaps to their boundaries. You now have an object that has the dimensions you would other wise have to figure. That object can easily be resized. Say W *.25, H *.13. After the transform, there is now an object for snapping the originals into new relationship.

Its pretty simple. Select the curves. Switch to the node tool, letter a, then click the join curves button which is in the tool context bar. In AD, while duplicate does make a copy, it is the command that starts the power duplicate procedure, which duplicates not only the object, but how it is then moved and/or scaled.

It is a feature that will be most welcome. In the interim, I'm using an app, Image Vectorizer, which cost $5 I think. Works pretty well.

Perhaps if you reduced the size of a single nudge. Probably not as precise as getting 1/3, etc. But a closer approximation, tho' lots of sub point or pixel nudges.

I know the results are not what you want. But, what a great way to get posterization.

Looking at some aircraft drawings, I see what I suppose are rivets depicted as either dots of small open circles. Both of those might be done using dotted lines. Chose the pen stool, set the stroke to what might be appropriate thickness, and draw a line, Default will give it rounded edges. Change the stroke to dotted, and give the dot size, the 1st entry box at the bottom, next to "DASH:" a very small value, .01 or less. Adjust the next number for the gap between. 1, for instance will give a continuous line of ever so slightly overlapping circles. Typically, these sorts of dots require minimal memory or storage. They can be turned into open circles by using the expand stroke command. Then, make the fill "none" and the stroke a small fraction of the circle size. These will take more resources. I just did a row of 80 6 pt dots, and the saved doc was 9K. Converted, the dic was a bit above 90K. I've done a few things this way using around 15000 dots of various sizes and colors. There was some lag, but the only time I've had a significant pause was trying a boolean union on 30000 dots. Another thing which might work in some cases is to draw a line, change it to a text path, and use a dingbat or symbol font to "type" the row in. This works nicely because the character spacing can be more flexible than the dotted line.

I think what Steve 1 is trying to do is just that. Using the pen to make an un-closed stroke, and then intersect or branch from that. Not do-able. It can be done w. a rectangle of extreme thinness, say .001", and using a boolean add. Or just draw the strokes and group them after the nodes are in just the right position.

Lovely work. The glint edge along the to of the instrument face is very nicely done.

Yeah, its an element that lots of people need/want. The topic has cropped up repeatedly. As I recall, this thread has a member's workable add on: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/3723-arrow-brush/?hl=%2Barrow+%2Bbrush

The relevant tools in AD have a controller option, which is can be modified via the "controller" menu in the context bar. Select an appropriate variable: pressure, velocity, or automatic. If the brush defaults do not have opacity and size variables set to be modified, they can be adjusted on the fly.

Of what is this thing of which you speak, "Illustrator"? :) No, AD doesn't have a completely automated 1 click. Its really easy to align objects to a particular object, its a snap, but each object or group needs a move of its own.

To expand a little on this good advice, the level of detail that works on a business card is often much less than a letterhead. The level of detail modern printing will easily achieve for a letterhead is not what is practical with vinyl signs w/o driving the vinyl pickers and placers insane. Etc. So while vector work is usable over a wide range of scales, the images produced may not.

While it might be done w. lots of work, given the amount of ripple in the perimeter, I suspect the mesh of the weave would end up rather distorted.

What kind of object is it? Vector or pixel? If pixel, just use different flood fills. If it is 2 vector objects that are grouped, they need to be ungrouped. Then the fill of each can be individually assigned.

The shapes flyout is the 15th tool down from the top. right under the rounded square. There are about 20 predefined shapes, with hundreds variations possible. The arrow shape has at least 40 variants.