PaulEC

As I understand it Times New Roman CE is just a variation of Times New Roman, so isn't it easier to accept the substitution? At least, just try it and check that the required Romanian characters display correctly. (If everything is OK, save it, so that you don't keep getting the missing fonts message whenever you open it.)

One point, which most people who want to move the visibility check boxes to the left seem to ignore, is what do you do with the fx and lock indicators? To me it seems better to keep all three indicators together. Where they are now, on the right, seems to make most sense. If you move them all to the left, do you leave a space for the other two indicators, or do the thumbnails shift around to accommodate them? Also, at least to me, "reading" left to right is logical. First you identify the layer with a thumbnail and text, then you see if has an fx applied to it, if it is locked and whether or not it is visible. All indicators lined up and easy to "scan"!

Use Blend Options. {The little cog at the top of the layers panel.) On the left hand graph, pull the right hand "dot" down. (The screen grab is from Photo, but it works the same in Designer.)

Hi @Rover Thomas Welcome to the forums. There are 10 day free trials for all three of the Affinity Apps, however posting this in a thread about a possible blend tool probably won't get much of a response! It should really be in the Customer Service section, hopefully a moderator will move it for you. I assume you have checked in your spam folder for replies?

For any work which is remotely important or irreplaceable: 1: Always work on a copy of your file. Don't work on original files. Always keep backups somewhere safe. For really important files, keep several copies in different locations. 2: If you're doing a lot of editing, or other work on a file, save incremental backups regularly, or at least at major stages of the job. (Don't just keep overwriting the same file.) 3: Don't save directly to any external drives (especially not to network drives,) save to a local drive and check the file is OK, before closing the app. (Once you know the file is OK you can get rid of interim backups if you want to save space, but always keep a backup of the original file as well as the edited version.) When you copy files to an external drive for archiving, check they are OK before deleting the original. (Yes, it might seem like a lot of extra work, but it's a lot less work than having to start from scratch!)

1: Save it as an Asset. Drag it onto the photo and resize if necessary. 2: Create a brush and "stamp" in on the photo. 3; Save it as an image, "place" into your photo.

I very much hope they will introduce a bundle price for v2. I'm sure that, with the introduction of StudioLink, many people will want the complete suite. Although individually the Affinity apps are comparatively cheap, unless there are very significant improvements and additional features, having to purchase all three apps at the same time, without any generous discounts, will put a lot of people off bothering to upgrade to v2.

The original post was not about looking forward to an upgrade to Designer. It was a complaint about "not being told" that the 2nd versions of the apps would have to be paid for. (Something that most of us are fully aware of!) So, yes, the discussion in the thread has developed into speculations about the next versions and version numbering. I can't see a problem with that – It's probably better for discussions to develop, rather than just repeating the same thing over and over again. (Which has happened in several other threads!) There's nothing wrong with the original "point" of a thread morphing into a discussion of things related to the OP (i.e. future versions). When you get a rant, like the first posts in this thread, there's not really much you can say directly about it, without breaking forum rules that forbid being rude about individuals! 😑

I don't doubt that one day photo apps will have just one big button. You load any old image and the app will do everything for you to produce a masterpiece: one that looks just like thousands of others, because you have had no input yourself in processing or editing it. I'm sure this would be a dream come true for many people; no need to learn any skills or for any artistic input, just press a button and let the AI do it for you! – For me, it would be a nightmare! There are certainly advantages to having some automation and computer aided effects/functions etc. Yes, it's great to be able to do things in seconds with a digital image, that would have taken hours (if they were possible at all!) in a traditional darkroom. The problem is getting the balance right! I think Affinity have it about right now, without dumbing down to suit people who don't want to have to learn anything, or do anything for themselves. There are apps out there, where you have little or no control and everything is decided for you, with no adjustments or fine tuning possible; the software decides for you what your picture should look like! If that's what you want, by all means use those apps. I really don't want APhoto to become one of them!

I really don't understand why some people get so upset about having to pay for software! It's your choice! There are plenty of free apps, for just about everything, if that's what you want. On the other hand, if you want the "market leader" brand, or some very specialised apps, you may have to pay through the nose for them. Then there are the others, like the Serif/Affinity apps, which do an excellent job and are reasonably priced. Different companies and organisations have different criteria for how they charge (or make money in other ways) to develop and distribute their apps. That's up to them! Personally I use a number of free apps and I have a few which I paid for with a "one off" fee. The only apps which I have bought, and expect to have to buy again if I want to get new versions, are the three Affinity apps. I am perfectly happy with that. Several of the other apps I use are now quite old, but they still work and I'm happy to keep on using them. When the next versions of the Affinity apps are released, I will decide if I think it's worth paying for them, if not, I'll just keep using the current versions. It's my choice, just like everyone else can choose what they want to do. (And, please, don't blame anyone else if you don't bother to read the marketing information and EULA properly, or if you don't make the most of free trials and return policies!)

It's obviously quite old now, and was only, originally, made for Designer. It doesn't work with newer versions of Designer. There's more information about it here:

Obviously I can see a compelling argument for this change, for the benefit of those people who use a graphics tablet and like to have the layers panel on the right side of their screen. (Obviously it's no problem for the rest of us to have to do things differently to accommodate these people, to save them getting used to having the layers panel on the other side.) It could, of course, cause problems for people who use a graphics tablet but like the layers panel on the left of the screen! Presumably, going on this argument, we also need to move the lock and fx icons to the left side of the layers panel. So we end up with the thumbnail, text and all the icons crowded up on the left, and a nice big empty space on the right! Seriously folks, there is already a lot of flexibility in the layout of the UI. But you can't expect things to be changed to suit every individual whim, with no thought for people who are already using the apps quite happily. I have no problems with things being changed for the better, when there is some improvement for users generally; but I really get fed up with people wanting things changed for everyone, just because it suits their preferences, (often just to make it the same as another app!)

The OP (finally) said, "The issue was that there was a lot of space around the MacBook (the sides and the bottom), and I wanted to remove that." firstdefence is, of course, perfectly correct that, to remove the background completely, the best way is to use a clipping path. However, as the OP had already started working with a mask, and, going on what he said he wanted to achieve, the simplest solution seemed to me to clip the canvas. It's only fair to add, that although clipping paths are great for comparatively simple shapes and vector objects, they are by no means appropriate in all situations. The picture in question is a raster image and the picture is very simple, making it easy to create a clipping path using the Pen Tool. However, if it had been more complex, a dog with a shaggy coat for example, it could have been difficult, if not impossible, to draw a satisfactory path. Therefore, it seemed reasonable to point out that, the quickest, easiest way to remove the excess transparent area, in this and similar cases, is to use clip to canvas.

Just for future reference, or for anyone else who may have a similar problem, just go to Document > Clip Canvas.