ogardiner

+1 Would be really helpful!

Just an update, with the new version 2.0.4 the file can be opened without crashing Designer Thanks guys! Cheers, Ole.

Hi MikeTO, you are a wizard That helped wonders! I had in fact already tried to move the linked images to a different folder, but I still had the Resource Manager open when opening the file. Closing the resource manager in addition to moving the linked files did the trick Amazing! Thanks for helping me out, it is much appreciated! Cheers, Ole.

Hi guys, today I've worked on a new Designer file (file created today, 1 artboard, 2 linked images, some icons etc.). After exporting the file to a PDF I've quit the application. 2 hours later I tried to open the file again, but unfortunately Designer crashed immediately. I've tried it several times, no success (immediate crash when opening the file, not even a flicker of a preview). I've tried to open the file in Photo, but it also crashes. I *could* open the file in Publisher and it looks ok (although it complains that I have to convert artboards into pages, of course). Unfortunately I could not fix the file by saving it again from Publisher and trying to reopen it with Designer (still crashes). Any help in fixing the file would be greatly appreciated! If you are interested in the file (~15MB), I can send it to you. Also if you need more information, I'll gladly help. Thanks and all the best, Ole Ah before I forget: Designer/Photo/Publisher 2.0.3, Mac OS X 12.6.2, Macbook Pro 15" Retina 2015

I've had to deal with this issue myself. My workaround for now: Don't create the slices from the artboard. Instead group all items on the artboard (a layer works, too) and create a slice from this group/layer. In some cases I have to adjust the slice position and size to cover the complete artboard, but other than that the export works flawless and I don't get the annoying rect with fill:none... Cheers.

Hi guys, first of all a big Thank you - I am a huge fan of Affinity Design and use it for all my projects. In general the usability is great and it is a pleasure to work with. But there is this tiny detail that has bitten me so many times that I at least wanted you to know :) The thing is: AD obviously remembers the last directory that I have saved or exported to. In general this is very helpful because when saving or exporting repeatedly from the same file, it is very likely that I intend to do that into the same directory. BUT... I often start my work by opening a recent file and saving this under a new name (e.g. "mydesign_02"...). And when I do, I usually want this copy to go into the same directory as the original file, not some other projects export folder from yesterday. I cannot count how many times I have done "Save as", then worked in the copy, then closed AD, only to notice that the file is not, in fact, in the same folder as the original. So I have to start AD again, open some file, select "Save as" and check which folder it is saving to, then find my copy and move it to its intended location. Pretty annoying :) I assume that this is not very easily fixed, but I still wanted to let you know :) I have a feeling that these kinds of usability details are exactly what you're trying to get right, so maybe you will come up with something smart ;) Thanks again, best, Ole.

@Ben You are right of course - it is only a few seconds and only once for each document. It won't stop me from using AD and loving it ;) It is just that these seconds weren't necessary in earlier versions. They are only now, and what for? Is the program better now that I have to use a workaround to do this simple task? To quote the Zen of Python: Just a last thought: In the end it is really not that important if a task takes a few seconds longer. But these seconds might push someone to chose another program altogether... Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to elaborate on this point :) Wishing you guys a nice weekend, Ole Trenner

@MEB Thanks, it's much appreciated :) @Ben Thanks for your insights. I agree that (maybe) the new approach might be more consistent, and I am aware of the possible workarounds. Still, the new behavior requires a more complicated workflow than the old behavior. And I know that you guys value usability and ux more than anybody else ;) There are probably ways to keep the new consistency while improving the ux: - Configuration options for the transparency grid colors would allow me to switch to completely white (or at least less obtrusive) grid - Slices could have a checkbox "include document background" - The "new document" modal could offer an option to automatically create the not-to-be-exported backdrop I'm sure you have even better ideas :) I just wanted to describe my use case and workflow. Anyway, keep up the great work, best, Ole Trenner

Just as a feedback for the dev team: I understand that you adjusted the behavior and now exported png files get a white background except when the document has the "transparent background" option checked. In previous versions the transparent background option only influenced the transparency grid on the document and not the background of exported files. Honestly, the new behavior might seem more consistent, but it is really uncomfortable. I create lots of ui assets (buttons, badges etc.) which need to have a transparent background. But I don't use the transparency grid because it does not provide a realisitic preview of how the ui asset looks on a typical user interface. Until now I could switch the document to use the white background and still export the png with a transparent background. If I needed the occasional opaque png, I could use the background option of the respective slice. Since 1.5 I have a much more complicated workflow: Now I have to check the "transparent background" option for my document, then create a white backdrop to preview my assets without the transparency grid, and then disable the backdrop in the export persona to still export assets with a transparent background. So much hassle... And the background option of each slice is more or less useless, because "transparent" does not mean transparent any more. I know I am but a single user, but maybe you can consider improving this behavior :) Thanks and keep up the great work, Ole Trenner [Edited: fixed typos]