R C-R

As that post makes clear, prior to around 1986, graphic designers had to work sans-Serif.  :lol:

The problem with potrace is not that it can't produce accurate, good looking results. It can do that, although some trial & error with the settings often is required to get that. The big problem is it creates many, many more nodes than manual tracing or a 'smarter' algorithm would produce -- sometimes hundreds of times more -- to get a reasonably accurate tracing.
 
There are various suggestions to mitigate this problem, like applying a small amount of blur or using a lower resolution version of the image, but in my experience this is far to tedious & hit or miss to be a viable solution for more than the occasional conversion. 
Another problem it shares with every other algorithmic tracer I have ever used is all the vectors produced have no stroke; instead, most are stacked on one or more larger outlines filled with the stroke color(s). This has the benefit of allowing very nuanced changes in the equivalent of the stroke width, but it makes it very difficult to organize the vector elements into logical groups so they can be modified or copied & pasted into other projects.
 
The Affinity staff have said they will offer a tracer only if & when they are happy with its capabilities. It is just a guess but I suspect they would like to avoid these issues & offer an "it just works" tracer that requires little or no trail & error to get something very close to what a skilled user could get by manually tracing the image. I think this would require much more advanced tracing algorithms than are currently in use, possibly ones that model human visual perception to determine what can & cannot be ignored, much like the lossy MPEG compressors do, but only in the spacial domain.

Never mind "in the end." It is doing just fine right now, has been for quite a while, & it is extremely unlikely that it will not continue to do so. It has nothing to do with the supposed damage to the company's reputation because <gasp> there is still some out-of-date info on the web if you look for it or any of the farfetched scenarios that might result from that.
 
Affinity/Serif will do more than "just fine" for several reasons:
1. The apps are remarkably good values.
2. The pace of development is amazing, even without considering how small the development team is or the enormity of trying to develop a suite of apps based on a single file format, which is almost without precedent in the software industry.
3. The staff, including the people who actually write the code, are remarkably straightforward & honest about the problems they have encountered & what they are doing to try to resolve them.
4. Even if Publisher is never released, there are viable alternative workflows in which using the existing Affinity apps still makes a lot of sense to a lot of people.
5. Did I mention that they are remarkably good values?
6. For the most part, people are not really so gullible or stupid that they cannot tell the difference between marketing hype & reality. This is true for almost all marketed goods & services; in the software industry "real soon now" has long since become a catch phase that almost everybody except the most naive have long since realized means very little other than "we are working on it."
 
Aside from all that, this horse has been beaten to death. Continuing to kick the corpse will not bring it back to life or do anything besides waste time & energy better applied to other, more productive things. Time to move on, folks.

Just as a point of reference, during testing I have imported 450 to over 600 page pdf versions of various owner manuals into AD. Each page has been imported as a separate artboard. Many of the pages have several dozen to well over 100 vector objects plus various blocks of text, so maybe 2 to up to 15 thousand layers total.
 
Even though my Mac has just 8 GB total memory, once imported AD handles this without complaints or unusual slow downs.

Just as a point of reference, during testing I have imported 450 to over 600 page pdf versions of various owner manuals into AD. Each page has been imported as a separate artboard. Many of the pages have several dozen to well over 100 vector objects plus various blocks of text, so maybe 2 to up to 15 thousand layers total.
 
Even though my Mac has just 8 GB total memory, once imported AD handles this without complaints or unusual slow downs.

Just as a point of reference, during testing I have imported 450 to over 600 page pdf versions of various owner manuals into AD. Each page has been imported as a separate artboard. Many of the pages have several dozen to well over 100 vector objects plus various blocks of text, so maybe 2 to up to 15 thousand layers total.
 
Even though my Mac has just 8 GB total memory, once imported AD handles this without complaints or unusual slow downs.

Have you considered using text for this? You could use either the bullet character • (Unicode U+2022) or the Black Circle character ● (Unicode U+25CF) in a suitable font & style. Type the required number of dots & then by changing the tracking value in the Characters panel (with or without using typed spaces between the dots) you can adjust the spacing as desired.
 
This also sort of works with curves converted to text paths, although the spacing isn't preserved if the curve is too abrupt.

Have you considered using text for this? You could use either the bullet character • (Unicode U+2022) or the Black Circle character ● (Unicode U+25CF) in a suitable font & style. Type the required number of dots & then by changing the tracking value in the Characters panel (with or without using typed spaces between the dots) you can adjust the spacing as desired.
 
This also sort of works with curves converted to text paths, although the spacing isn't preserved if the curve is too abrupt.

And I believe it to be poorly named, because there are several classes of affine transformations, besides linear translations, including linear scaling, rotation, & shear. "Offset" isn't a great name either. Personally, I think "Shift" would be better, but that is just me.
 
Another difference is what most people know as a cloud filter is called the Perlin Noise filter in Affinity Photo. This one (I assume) is technically correct, if a bit obscure.
 
On a way too pedantic level, note that "Photo" in the app's name is not pluralized. This is not always important, but since Apple has given their photo app the ridiculously generic name "Photos," referring to Affinity Photo in the forums as "Photos" can cause confusion, at least for Mac users. Most forum regulars refer to Affinity Photo as "AP" or "AF" for short. The as yet unreleased Affinity Publisher is sometimes referred to as "APub," & Photoshop often as "PS."
 
Since you mentioned being new to layer editors, one thing that trips up a lot of users (not all of them noobs!) is the difference in AP between a pixel & an image layer. Pixel layers (indicated by a "(Pixel)" suffix in the Layers panel) can be edited at the pixel level, but image layers (indicated by an "(Image)" suffix in the Layers panel) are treated as objects, so they can only be scaled, rotated, etc. So if for example a brush isn't doing anything, it is most likely because you are working on an image layer. Image layers can be converted to pixel layers by right-clicking on them in the Layers panel & choosing "Rasterize" from the context menu.

Hi ubanto777!
 
I found what seems to be the same png on this Bevertown Brewery web page. I opened the image in a new tab (direct link), dragged it out onto the desktop & opened it in Affinity Photo.
 
I don't know why it would have anything to do with the weird clipping you got, but I noticed that the background is not completely transparent -- there is a faint shadow & a few other non-transparent pixels in the background. (I discovered this by dragging out the Flood Select (a.k.a. magic wand) tool on the background.) So instead of using CMD+A to select the entire pixel layer, I CMD-clicked on the thumbnail in the layers panel, which excluded those 'extra' pixels from the selection. (I'm not sure why that happened either -- I would have expected all the not totally transparent pixels to be selected.)
 
Anyway, a CMD+C copy of that selection pasted into another Affinity Photo document behaved normally -- no weird clipping & no oversized bounding box when the pasted layer was selected.

I discovered Affinity Designer shortly after it first appeared on the Mac App Store, around the end of December 2014. It was only at version 1.1.2 back then, & lacked a lot of its current features, but even so, after downloading the trial version & playing around with it for a couple of hours, I went back to the store & bought it.
 
Price had something to do with it, but more than that I liked that it was fast, very well integrated with OS X, & perhaps most of all that it was not an Adobe product. I never forgave Adobe for killing Freehand, nor did I like Adobe's methods of implementing cross-platform compatibility, which often resulted in ignoring system level API's in favor of Adobe written, platform-independent ones that regularly caused problems in the pre-subscription era whenever OS X was upgraded.

If you don't want to open PS just for this, you can also use the NIK collection as stand alone apps.

I can't help with the Facebook issue but info about the "A" series of paper sizes can be found in many places on the web, for example here.
 
Note that these are not exactly page sizes but paper sizes.

I do not understand what you mean by any of this. Why do you think 132,3 mm x 253,3 mm must be 104 x 58 mm, if that is what you are saying? How specifically are you making the comparison with an A6 paper size & the template size?
 
It may help to know that the length of a point (pt) has several different definitions, & that Affinity (like Photoshop & most other graphic apps) uses the so-called "DTP point" (desktop publishing point) as standard. That is equal to 1/72 of an inch, or slightly less than 0.3528 mm (0.3527777778 mm to 10 decimal places). So for example, 375 points is equal to about 132.3 mm (132.2916666667 mm to 10 decimal places), & so on.
 
"A" series paper sizes are defined by the ISO 216 standard, which of course is based on the metric system to begin with, but because they are based on an A0 size of one square meter & each subsequent smaller size A(n) is defined as A(n-1) cut in half parallel to its shorter side, which would reduce the area by a factor of the square root of two (another irrational number), the standard sizes are rounded to the nearest mm.
 
So, while an A6 sized object in Affinity is exactly 105 x 148 in mm, it is about 297.6 x 419.5 in points, about 4.134 x 5.827 in inches, or about 297.64 x 419.53 in pixels.

I am still not completely sure what has confused you, but The Ultimate Guide To iPhone Resolutions & iPhone 6 Screens Demystified web pages may help you understand the relationship of 'native' point resolution to display resolution.

MEB, your reply was far more considerate than the response I didn't post...

Have you looked in the View menu to see if the "Show Context Toolbar" item is checked?

https://xkcd.com/1197/
 
same with Office 365 btw 

I don't know if it is how MyClay found it, but it is mentioned in the built-in help topic "Color panel." From the Color selection preferences and color models section:
 
The Apple Color Picker is a utility built into OS X; it is not a part of the Affinity apps. Its RGB slider mode appears to be limited to 8 bit values (0-255) regardless of the bit depth of the Affinity document. Also, it has its own color profile selector (details here in the incorrectly named "To Set the Color Space for a Swatch" section), which is independent of the profile set for the Affinity document.
 
In contrast, as you have seen the Affinity color mode options set in the Studio Colors panel preferences are applied throughout the UI wherever applicable. They are also "sticky," meaning they will retain the last mode the user selected each time the Affinity app is launched. There is no need for a preference for this -- each user can choose the option they prefer & freely switch among them on the fly depending on the needs of the moment.

Hi moksha!
 
Your #1 is not as elementary as you might think because there is no way (that I know of, anyway) to create & snap a node to the midpoint of a line segment that is not aligned to some other existing snapping point.
 
There may be some other ways to do this but what I ended up doing is as follows (modifier keys are for a Mac):
 
1. Duplicate the hexagon with CMD+J
2. Hold down CMD & SHIFT (to scale proportionally from the center) & drag a corner handle of the dup inward until it snaps to the vertical sides of the original hexagon.
3. Hold down SHIFT & rotate the dup by 45°.
At this point the corners of the dup should be touching the midpoints of the segments of the original:

4. Convert the original to curves & with the Node tool add a node anywhere on the segment you want to divide.
5. Drag the new node to the corner of the duplicate. It should snap there if the 'Snap to shape key points' snapping option is enabled.
6. Delete the dup, break the curve at the new node, & go from there.
 
Your #2 is much easier: Just create a 3 sided polygon (or a triangle), convert to curves, add a node on the bottom segment, & drag it wherever you want. With snapping enabled you can position it horizontally aligned with the top node if you want.

@MBd
 
If you click on an image in his slideshow (not the thumbnail) it stops advancing automatically.

And to about half a million others?  :lol:

You may not have noticed that the Studio Color panel is context aware & the large round color swatches represent different things depending on the tool selected. For the Paint Brush Tool, they represent a 'primary' & a 'secondary' color; for the Pixel tool & for some other functions, the 'secondary' color is the background color. By default, the X keyboard shortcut toggles the selected color between the two swatches.
 
So in effect, the X key functions for the Paint Brush tool much like Drag+CTRL does for the Pixel tool's alternate background color mode. Also, holding down the alt/option key & dragging changes the tool to a color picker, one that works anywhere on the screen, not just on the canvas, giving users a quick way to set either swatch to any color visible anywhere on the screen.

Red signifies the starting node. The shapes indicate the type of node; round for Bézier (smooth), square for Sharp, & round with a dot for Smart.
 
There are some illustrations of this in the included help system: open Affinity Designer Help from the Help menu (Mac); click on "Drawing Lines & Shapes" > "About lines & shapes" to see them.

In Affinity Photo RAW editing is destructive in the sense that once a RAW file is developed, you can't go back to the "undeveloped" state to change the develop settings & develop it again. But this does not delete or otherwise affect the original RAW file, so if worst comes to worst, you can open it & try different develop settings, creating a new afphoto file.