davide445

The EPS trick worked thanks, sure using AP for this humble activities is far from the glory it deserves, but luckily I'm using it (not as frequently I would like) also for more creative activities. Now the real works on the music begun

Hi davide445
Bravura seems to work fine, but the MScore font has unsupported characters as noted in the Font Manager.
joe_l's suggestion is likely the best solution in this case.
Meanwhile i've reported this for the devs to take a look at. 
Lee

The Affinities have problems with the fonts. A workaround could be to save the PDF as EPS and then opening in APublisher / ADesigner. Please note, that in this case all fonts are converted to curves. See attached EPS. Or open in Inkscape.
Canon_in_D_Violin_Duet.eps

The measures listed in the first post are not clear.
What DPI will you use for the final poster of 170x200cm? Do you use about 25k pixel for 200cm (300dpi)?
If you zoom in to 100% (pixel view), of course there will be visible jagging, but now the dots far far smaller and less noticeable compared to using 5000px (about 75 DPI). 
 
 
 

Voronoi is a pixel filter, as all filters. But is uses the full resolution of the document, there is no artificial limit. 
 
Yes, only solution. 
 

Thanks for the extra information.
Note: The video you are watching uses Designer, not Publisher, and they have different functionalities. It doesn’t matter in this case but it’s worth keeping in mind.
Joining and closing curves can be a ‘finicky’ business and I don’t understand all of the various ‘foibles’ of those functionalities.
As thomaso said above, the direction of each curve matters a lot in most cases.
In this case, once you have joined and closed the curves you can use Geometry Add on the result to remove the ‘extra bits’.
See my attached video.
Note: The result of the YouTube video isn’t very realistic because the shadow is only on one side of the ribbon.
2023-05-22 09-10-54.mp4

Your screenshot does not show nodes or handles, so it is hard to judge what exactly was drawn / what we look at indeed.
Just in case: Your text description made me think of issues with the handles when joining/closing two curves, caused by the direction they where dragged when drawn before, for instance:

This is working thanks

Hold down shift and use this handle

The font looks like a 3D rendering. How about simulating it with the Smudge Brush Tool (B)?

That "font" looks like Abstract ABC by Chroma Supply, available as Assets from the Affinity Store.
If I were trying to do something compatible with that, I'd probably start with Abstract Paint by Chroma Supply, also available from the Affinity Store, and try overlaying your ballerina with one of the overlays available in that asset package, experimenting with opacity, blend modes, and masking as necessary.

That method probably didn’t work as the example image you gave doesn’t match the images you want to work on.
For those two images, which already have a transparent background, I would probably just add a Recolour Adjustment to each, setting the Lightness to 100%. Then, where you have coloured areas of the original image, use the Brush Tool to paint over those areas of the adjustment in White to mask the adjustment in those areas. See my attached image and file.

black-to-white-with-recolour.afphoto

After a little experimentation I managed to get something that looks a little bit like a screen door effect with a couple of Procedural Texture Live Effects and a Halftone Live Effect but it only works at certain zoom levels and isn’t quite right.
I’ve attached the afphoto file in case you want to take it further with more experimentation (I’ve messed around with lots of settings so you will have to check various things to see how it works).
Hopefully someone else has something better.
vr-screen-door.afphoto

R16 is a single channel format that contains red channel information—it's typically used for height maps in landscape creation software/game engines etc.
Affinity Photo doesn't have any direct R16 export capabilities. However, you could try the following @davide445 :
Flatten your document if you have layer work (Document>Flatten). On the Channels panel, scroll down and right click Pixel Green then choose Clear. Do the same with Pixel Blue. Note that Pixel will be whatever your layer is named (so it might be Background if you haven't flattened your document). Ignore the Composite channels at the top as they won't offer the option to clear the channel data. You should now be left with just red channel information. Go to File>Export and choose the PNG format. Click the More button and find Pixel format. Choose Greyscale 16-bit from the dropdown and then export. Your mileage may vary with this—some people have reported success importing these 16-bit greyscale PNGs into the software they're using.
Alternatively, if you don't specifically need the greyscale bitmap and just wanted to export an RGB image with only the red channel data, ignore the PNG export steps and just use whatever format you wish. Hope that helps!

What type of PDF are you exporting to? Some PDF types don’t allow for various features such as transparency, etc.

This was produced in Substance Alchemist using the Match and Equaliser Filters

I think what you are doing is taking the photo too close, because of this you are creating a "hot spot". I would try taking the image further away and cropping in on the selection needed.

I'd use the PBR workflow(/s) always that you can, because :
a) Is here to stay, is what we need to use for most things now.
b) Even in 3D (after all I believe it comes from Disney) for just rendering, movies, it is used there, (blender has it now in a way, with its "principled shader... couldn't they call it just PBR shader, lol)  as is not something used only for better realism... In a cartoon style, stylized 3D, is also used as gives better materials, more realistic plastics, metal, etc, have advantages in other styles, there are also other advantages.
c) You never know with the job market. Doing things as required for entire fields like games, in a way, also film, and even in VR companies, well, helps to kind of build professional experience, and one never knows when will have to work at certain type of job. (I mean, I've changed fields a number of times)
I was only mentioning to avoid it if you are in a hurry and is just a fast project where is not worth for you the hassle, but seems you are dedicated to it.
About format for the camera. I'm no photographer. There are here people knowing a lot more about it. I know I wouldn't use JPG or any other lossy format for textures, that's for sure. As what I do know is how to make game textures, and you don't want to find color artifacts and blurry details.... Now, if using tiff or raw, I guess will depend on ability with those in your phone to carry the color profile, and things like that.  For height maps, I know we'd better work (and I guess already from the capture) in 16 bits mode, as is all about the smooth gradients. With whatever you are doing the photos, configure the settings to no loss, maximum quality. I would not use flash, and if your camera allow it, to handle all settings in manual, for the ISO thing, to allow photos with more aperture, controlling the exposure time and etc (in a way so you avoid the flash in low light, but...just use great daylight....but not super sunny going direct to the texture, either) . Is only a few photos that you are going to remove soon from the phone, anyway, so, fine if being bulky files. In my very old years, I used to need a macro in the camera for this kind of photo, and a very, very good camera. Otherwise, you'll be better off with even crappy textures on inet depots. ( and I mean way worse than the links I just pasted)
Affinity Photo is of very much use, as you don't have Substance or any other similar tool. So, to actually customize and "evolve" the texture, you can hand edit all those maps in Affinity, and go checking the results in a 3D viewer, be your game engine, or Toolbag 3, or any 3D viewer providing a view almost like the engine.  I'd highly recommend the engine in any case for a 1:1 check, but if toolbag, or Blender , or whatever, gives you a faster preview,  and is quite similar to how it shows in the engine, that's what you use, so to work fast as you edit those albedo (difuse) and etc maps, as needed. The base materials from sources I provided, those are good to go, I wouldn't modify to not loose the accurate values too much... But you definitely will want to apply masks, mix, add corrosion, over paint, etc, so to actually do the textures, as some things will only require a plan basic material, like bare steel; others do require more the kind of work you'd do with Substance painter, but old school, we used to do this by editing those maps, checking in real time how it did look in the engine, as we paint + save.   Of course, is faster to buy substance, for these uses. But even with it,  in the end you work always with a 2D package helper, be it Photoshop, AP or whatever.

Testing a bit ShaderMap appear to be really streamlined in his usage, most forgiving in term of input material than Quixel Mixer, able to autogenerate all what is needed, with good controls for the other parts. It's only a bit slow in applying and preview changes, and this can be a problem for doing experiments such as I'm doing.
About PBR vs non PBR workflow both Unreal and Unigine are using PBR so it's not my choice I suppose (or I can always work on a non-PBR workflow? Pardon my ignorance, I never approached before this question).
What I find anyway Affinity Photo useful it's part of the illumination and lens distortion correction, something more specialized tools didn't consider at all.
Also going to experiment with photo based textures, my smartphone camera is able to shoot in RAW format, for my needs will I have any benefit in starting from this format? 

I don't know how good could be these, haven't checked,, but you really might want to have a look, to have the project up and running fast....
https://freepbr.com/
In the next link, check the "free" field in the search. Maybe purchase some of the best ones you find, for materials that are more "critical" or closes shots in your project.
https://www.poliigon.com/search
Another depot, also with free option :
https://www.cgbookcase.com
Amazed that the following is CC0, so, public domain but better, fully fully free, and even have AO, Roughness, normal and elevation maps...
https://cc0textures.com
Another one here
https://www.blendernation.com/2018/12/22/free-pbr-texture-library/
Which is actually a blendernation link for this place.Also CC0 free textures, with quite some maps per each.
https://www.sharetextures.com
Another one, again CC0, and again containing enough maps each.
https://3dtextures.me/tag/pbr/
Last but not least, another site with CC0 PBR textures, this one even 8k textures!   
https://texturehaven.com/textures/
I mean... I'd start from these, mount the project. Further on if needed, improve the materials and whatever.  But you get the thing fast up and running.  Just learn how to load the stuff well on the engine, all the maps and etc.   

@SrPx next Wednesday will be on the location of a construction I want to map the materials, to develop a version of his simulation with maximum similarity (there will be also other versions more relaxed in term of realism).
Based on current PBR workflow a better way will be use the photos just as reference and use product such as Mixer to achieve the result "mixing" other available Megascan materials and decals, or better use the actual photos and products such as Materialize to create the final material, as from the beginning of the thread.
What do you think about the best option?

I like the procedural approach, and I like to generate textures from scratch, or crazily mixing sources. Today though, unless is for indy games or fast protoyping, I'd say this way is a kind of frowned upon, as is now almost a must (even for small studios using typically Unity and Unreal engines) to use a PBR based workflow. This means using high quality scans of realistic textures, then use a strict set of maps, which are all established, and that tools like Substance Paint/Designer or Quixel, have normalized so that the values stay in the PBR standards. I'm old school, and this has made less fun for me texturing, even  when considering how we'd texture for mods back in Quake 1-2 mods times, the fun has gone decreasing since then, lol. But the PBR arrival was the "fun is over", for me. And I did it as a job, not a hobby... but started as a hobby... is less and less artistic and more and more a matter of replication and using specialized tech ....very rigid procedures.

An example of what Filter Forge can create.
 
Main Image

 
Reflective Occulsion

 
Normal

 
Diffuse

 
Ambient Occulsion

 
Bump

I did it procedurally, I think you'd get more consistent and controllable results this way. You could then create variations or rotate say a tile to give a more authenticate look.

Hi both,
Unfortunately there is no "normalize" filter. Have a look at this tutorial. It will help you understand how to create the texture: 
Thanks,
Gabe.