PaulEC

If you have another photo with a similar background, it may be possible to replace the blown out area with that.

I've edited my post, as it obviously depends on the version you downloaded for the trial. I'd assumed, as the post I was replying to was only posted a few hours ago, that it would have had the warnings. Mea culpa!

I know it's easy to be wise after the event, but, really, it's never a good idea to use trial. or beta, versions of software for serious work. EDIT: There are warnings about opening v1 files in v2; it's as well to take notice of them!

I didn't think there were any! 😁

... it is not as easy to implement as a lot of people seem to think! Serif have said that they will add RTL when possible, but that it will take some time to implement, possibly needing a complete rewrite of the text engine. IMHO, I think that it would be good to add RTL support for those who need it, but that there are a lot of other features and fixes, needed by the majority of users, which the development team should sort out before they use limited resources to work on a feature which is only of interest to a minority of users. (Before anyone tells me how many people use RTL languages, that is not the point: The important thing is how many more people would buy the software because it supports RTL.)

Just my personal experience: I first installed the MSIX versions, they installed and worked OK. When the MSI versions were available, I installed these instead. (No particular reason, other than a "gut feeling" that I prefer traditional software to Microsoft app. versions. - Plus it's easier to drop a file on the desktop icon to open it!) In practice there seems to be virtually no difference between the two versions, apart from how they are installed and (again, just a "gut feeling",) that the MSI version runs fractionally faster than the MSIX version. There are, as I understand it, bigger differences if you're bothered about sandboxing or need to install on a corporate network etc, but for an average user like myself, both versions seem to install and work equally well.

Does it matter, as long as the shortcuts work?

But can they be embedded in a PDF? If not, and they can only be installed/used in Affinity apps, won’t that be a problem for most printers? (I suppose they could be converted to curves, but that’s hardly ideal!)

So, presumably, this means that they can only be printed from an Affinity app. If you use them in a job which is then sent to a pro printers, they won’t be able to print them correctly?

You can get that with a very narrow text frame. I was referring to MickRose's comment "You also get this with just a standard text frame of zero width. I seem to remember this issue was raised a few years ago." Logically nothing should show in a zero width text frame, but you do actually get this slightly odd effect of a single column of letters. As joe_l pointed out, this means that, when using two columns, with no gutter, these letters are superimposed over the text in the next column. All I'm saying is that this may be a bit odd, but there are no scenarios, that I can see, where it actually matters, so it's not worth worrying about! 😉

This could probably be classed as a bug, but at the end of the day, I'm not sure it really matters, or is worth trying to "fix"! Why would anyone want a zero width text frame and what would be the point in putting text in it? 😉

Well spotted!

I think this only works with columns, it won't balance the text in linked text frames. The easiest way is to select all the text frames then drag up the bottom of the frames until they are even. Or, instead of three text frames, use one text frame with three columns. (Then use balance columns!)

There is a support forum for the old, legacy software, but if you don't have a note of the Product Key, I doubt if there is much else you can do. https://punster.me/serif/

If it's any help, if you can retrieve your Product key, the Registration number for all products is 881887 (you don't need/ can't get one from Serif).