PaulEC

You're right, but I was thinking that you could probably achieve the effects you want using non destructive adjustments, rather than using burn and dodge tools that are destructive. I'm not really understanding what you are trying to achieve. From what you say it seems as though you are trying to burn and dodge on a transparent/black layer and expecting it to apply to the pixel/background layer below it. If that's the case, it won't work! If you don't want to damage the original picture, as Walt said, duplicate it and work on that. (Or just work on a copy, not on the original file.) An alternative (which is non destructive) to using burn and dodge tools is to add a new fill layer above your picture, fill it with mid grey and set the blend mode to overlay. You can then use the paint brush to paint on this layer with black or white to give the effect of burning or dodging on the picture.

Adjustment layers have a mask that you can paint on (with the Paint Brush, using black and white) to hide or show parts of the adjustment effect, in the same way as using a mask, that you have added yourself to a pixel layer, can show or hide parts of your picture.

I'm not too clear what you mean by "I am not offered to download", is the problem that you click on "Download" and nothing happens? You can also add content from within the apps, rather than doing it manually. (I would suggest that you edit the image you posted, so that it does not show your email and the product code.)

To be honest I can't see what the blank/black pixel layer is supposed to be doing, but if you want to use the dodge/burn tools you need to be using them on the background layer. You might find it better to apply the adjustments selectively by painting on the adjustment masks.

It might help if you could post a screen grab of the full screen including the layer panel.

👍

Try adjusting the Contrast and the Cell Size. You may need different settings to those shown in the screen grab. (You may also need to reverse the direction of the gradient and the size/position of the gradient relative to the letter.) ice_video_20220606-090450.mp4

Not that this really helps, but it opens for me (on Windows) with no problem, (other than complaining about some missing resources). It opens in all three apps, so if you have the others, it might be worth trying to open it in AD or APhoto.

👍

Strange that they do still include APub and give it 4.7 stars out of 5. It's odd that they also include several apps that are not DTP apps (eg PDF editors.) that also don't meet all their (slightly odd) criteria! – I don't think I'd give much weight to their opinions! 😄 To be honest I always get a bit of a chuckle myself when people try to prove a point by referring to comments on some obscure website, as though anything said by anyone online must be a fact written in stone! 😁

I wondered why I had them and where they came from! 😄

Maybe you accidentally closed it. In the Develop Persona, go to View - Studio and tick Basic.

Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure if these had actually come with AD, or if someone had found a way to convert the brushes from DrawPlus. (I do tend to collect all sorts of bits and bobs, and I can never remember where they came from!)

I did wonder! - I can only think they were a freebie from somewhere! 😁

OT WARNING! Odd little aside! I have these brushes (along with a few others) in AD, in a set called "Images". I have no idea where they came from, but I do know they were also in DrawPlus! Does anyone know if these brushes came with AD? Also, is there is a way to export and convert DrawPlus brushes to use in AD?

When I go to create a new document, I have this dialogue in "Templates" (I assume they came with APub). I've never used any of them (although I do have a few templates that I made myself that I use occasionally). Assuming everyone has these, I wonder how many people actually do use them. I would suspect that most people who ask for templates would say that these are not the ones they want! (PagePlus had dozens of the things, I don't remember ever using any of them, because none of them were exactly what I needed!) So the question is, if APub did include a number of templates, just how many would have to be included to cater for all the different needs of the people who are so keen on having templates included in APub? I don't believe that the lack of templates in APub is intended to put anyone off using APub, it is simply practical. If it's a really simple template, it's really easy to make one yourself, rather than trying to have all possible variations. (For example, why not include a "simple" three leaf folder? – Trifold? or "Z" fold? For A4? A3? Letter size? Legal size? All in portrait or landscape format. – That's sixteen different templates to start with!) The more complex the template, the more variations will be possible. If you want newsletters or magazines, just think of all the possible variations and layouts there are! There could be hundreds of templates included, but there would always be people who want something else. As has been said, if you do want templates there are plenty out there to choose from. However, I'm sure for the majority of users, they prefer to create their own documents/publications etc, exactly how they want them, rather than relying on a template that lot's of other people are also using. Personally I don't want software bloated with endless templates, that I'll never use; I'd rather Serif spent their time and efforts on new features and bug fixes. 😉 EDIT: Just for the heck of it, I thought I'd have a quick check of how many templates were included in PagePlus. I gave up at 500 and I wasn't anything like half way though the list! No problem for Sefif to do all those for APub! 😁

It sounds like you're trying to use the erase tool on the mask. Don't! Paint on the mask with a basic Paint Brush. Use black to remove (effectively "erase") something and paint with white to restore it.

IMHO - No! There are so many possibilities (35/54 in the packs mentioned) and variations, how many do you include as "standard"? Premade templates are rarely exactly what you need; if you make similar documents on a regularly basis, just make your own templates and reuse them. It's a bit like people who want a "one click" solution to everything in Photo! Sometimes you have to put a bit of effort in to get the results you want, rather than just producing stuff that is the same as everyone elses just because it's easier.

I'm sure it should be possible for a user preference for the unit type to override the one used in the template etc. It doesn't affect the document itself, just the units displayed. It's not a big deal, it's easy enough to change after opening the item, it would just be handy for people who prefer to use the same units all the time.

If you click on Browse - Forums at the top of this page there is a list of the various sections of the forum.

I suppose the best thing would be if the unit stayed as you set it until you change it to something else. (Rather than depending on the last document you opened.)

I'm with you on that, it drives me up the wall! 😄 I've never understood the logic of why some settings are sticky and others aren't! It would be great to have some means of setting the "stickyness" yourself when setting things like units and spread/page export options.

If you change the units for a document it only changes them for that document. You can choose whatever units you want when creating a new document. AFAIK when you open an image/photo in APhoto it always loads them using pixels.

I do take your points, and I have no problem with changes being made if they are also improvements. What I have a problem with is the number of people who ask for changes to be made simply to make Affinity apps more like other apps (usually Adobe ones!) without actually improving anything.

While I can see that some new users may prefer what they are used to in other apps, it hardly seems reasonable to me that existing users should be expected to keep relearning various aspects of the Affinity apps to save new users the effort of learning to use a new app! I don't have a problem with using an "eye" instead of a tick-box, they would function in the same way, but why on earth move it to the other side of the layer panel! One thing that particularly gets on my nerves is the way some new users (not the OP) want things changed because of their "muscle memory". What about the "muscle memory" of existing users!