Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tariq

  1. having a tables feature (with proper styles) is great but I can't figure out how to anchor the table into the text .. so that if the text moves, the table moves with it .. I guess the same question applies to inserted images.. this is what I meant earlier on here an on twitter - Publisher needs to be more than Designer with pages .. it needs to take into account workflow for longer texts .. so if I add a word on page 3, and that causes text to move all the way down to page 293, the images and tables etc need to move too.. is it the case that I just can't find how to do this?
  2. I'd like to test it again when anchored images/other content can reflow with the text looking at the changelog I can't see it - have I misread it?
  3. I often use the crop tool. It would be incredibly helpful if it could be aligned / snap to common objects and guides. For example: snapping to objects. snapping to edge aligning to centre of document That last one would be incredibly helpful. Currently cropping is entirely manual I believe.
  4. CorelDraw just popped up with a Mac version. It has a bitmap to vector function (which was in their classic product 10+ years ago...) https://www.coreldraw.com/en/product/coreldraw/mac/ I really think Designer would benefit from this.
  5. Given how terrible the initial Affinity Publisher beta was .. and how it has drastically improved as a result of many people here doing testing, and providing suggestions, some of which will be critical to the success of the product (master pages, embedded images reflowing, etc) .. .. who agrees that Affinity should reward this in some way. I don't expect they'll pay a share of their profits .. even though the product would likely have been a flop without the advice provided by friends here... perhaps a discount or reimbursement scheme would be more realistic?
  6. still waiting for reflowing embedded content like images .... it's really critical for any DTP workflow .. I know Affinity say it's on the to-do list but it should be a higher priority than some of the things on that changeling list ... let's put it plainly - DTP is not Designer with Pages - it's for working with documents of many pages .. changes to layout, styles, margins, boxes, .. will cause text to move .. and you want anchored content like diagrams to also move intelligently .. you don't want to do that manually for documents of more than 5 pages. that is pretty core.
  7. I've always loved Lightzone's Zone Mapper - which is based loosely on Ansel Adam's zone/tone idea. The idea is extremely intuitive .. but. the execution has an efficient and productive UI. Despite having used Adobe Photoshop, GIMP, Krita, Affinity Photo, etc .. I still keep the free Lightzone installed for the zone (tone) mapper. (I also love the very easy and intuitive shape tool which acts as a mask for applying any filter or operation .. with adjustable non-destructive shape and edge transition) Here's a set of video tutorials https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq1tyuZXbpo&list=PLUECp8xv0O0DPqRL8Qgrs6ZQVVvrGfZPP I really wish Affinity did this .. instead of the less intuitive set of filters which seem to have a high barrier to expertise .. and seem very inefficient in terms of desktop real estate ... their retained settings are counterintuitive. Just honest friendly feedback.
  8. Hi I am a heavy user of the alignment options (see pic). I find the number of mouse moves and clicks is slowing my workflow down. Can I assign presets to keyboard shortcuts? If so, how? I want to select a bunch of objects and press the key combination for them to be aligned according to the preset.
  9. thanks! that's helpful (I'll add this as a suggestion as it should be quick)
  10. ok - is there a recommended way of doing this with some accuracy?
  11. thanks - I tried it and yes it does snap to edges .. but not the centre of the canvas .. is this possible? cutting out the centre is a very common use case
  12. This is a screenshot of Affinity Photo on a non-retina Macbook Air 2017. You can see the font rendering is so bad it is unreadable in places. Look for the word "steps" under "Fip Horizontal" and "Flip Vertical" I know that MacOS Mojave changed font rendering. I have observed this issue with and without this commonly suggested remedy: defaults write -g CGFontRenderingFontSmoothingDisabled -bool FALSE Please can this be added to the bug tracker.
  13. hi @GabrielM - yes of the several apps Ive looked at only the Affinity ones do this. To be clear - the font rendering Mojave does on non-retina displays is terrible but the Affinity Apps seem to have a particularly bad rendering. Note there is a difference between the "Flip Vertical" rendering and the "Steps" 1" rendering so they may be using a different font or UI toolkit? Perhaps have Affinity detect the type of display and use a more readable font? After all - we've had 40 years of legible fonts on non-retina displays ... :)
  14. This is a screenshot of Affinity on a non-retina Macbook Air 2017. You can see the font rendering is so bad it is unreadable in places. Look for the word "steps" under "Fip Horizontal" and "Flip Vertical" I know that MacOS Mojave changed font rendering. I have observed this issue with and without this commonly suggested remedy: defaults write -g CGFontRenderingFontSmoothingDisabled -bool FALSE Any suggestions?
  15. really excited by Publisher beta ! So I've added some images and text frames in the master pages (facing). And created normal pages from these master pages... so far so normal. The text frames are visible in the normal pages view but I can't add / insert any text to them. It's almost as if APublisher wants me to add text frames only in the normal pages and only use guides in the master pages? Am I missing something?
  16. What are your wishes for Affinity Publisher for 2019? Mine are simple: master pages that work as design templates embedded content (images) that reflow with text <fingers crossed>
  17. So we've previously discussed why and how Publisher can't do the very basics like enable a workflow that allows us to work on documents of 20 pages, 200, pages, 2000 pages .. like a DTP app is supposed to? Master pages were a key focus of this discussion. We talked about the lack of an open development process that bidirectionally engages the supportive community - its the best way to derisk a technology project - start with users, and work with users as you develop iteratively. Nothing new here. Today we get an email telling us of great progress. of the 3 key new features we get the ability to "apply a Master Page to a Master Page". Is it just me who is wondering what Affinity's priorities are? In what way is that a higher priority than getting master pages to actually work like they are supposed to - to enable a workflow that scales with tens, hundreds, even thousands of pages. Gobsmacked is me. https://affinityspotlight.com/article/affinity-publisher-public-beta-170162-now-available/
  18. Seriously. A DTP tool that can't provide a usable workflow that scales to more than about 5 pages is in serious trouble. More detail here: https://medium.com/@postenterprise/affinity-publisher-beta-hands-on-review-4f5f05c96c02 Secret plans? I don't think Affinity need to worry about secret plans if they can't provide a tool that allows us to work with documents of more than 5 pages with text and images that reflow automatically according to a master page design.... again my original point.. priorities.
  19. With all due respect, this is contrary to the lessons learned by software development teams all over the world over the last 20 years or so. Also, your understanding of what a beta is, is mistaken. Allow me to humbly clarify: user research - what's the problem to be fixed, who are the users, how do they want to work, what are the actual user needs alpha - user research leads to proposed ideas for solutions, these ideas are the basis for experiments to see if the proposed solutions are going to work, some do, some don't beta - having found solutions that the alpha experiments suggest will work, we now refine them, focussing on testing them, to seek feedback from edge cases, scaling issues, issues we only see from wider exposure. at this stage, we are testing a solution that meets user needs. live and iterate What alpha and beta are NOT, is a list of features or a development timeline divided into two, with one called alpha and the next called beta. A beta is testing a solution that meets user needs. The current Publisher "beta" doesn't meet user needs. Again - no malice intended, just facts and wisdom. Do feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, we're all forever learning.
  20. and we've seen the problems that has led to... what's better? closed process leading to a bad product open process leading to a successful product also, having an open process isn't the same as having your code open
  21. wouldn't it be so much better if the development process was open ...
  22. Designer is great. But sadly Photo I feel has an incoherent UI and UX. This isn't saying Photo lacks features, or things aren't possible with Photo. This is saying that the metaphor or philosophy that arranges the many functions in Photo isn't well thought through - sorry to say this, I now loads of work has gone into it. Some things to think about: Findability - make it easy to find things by grouping them logically, context aware presentation of options is also helpful. Currently unrelated stuff is together, and related stuff is far apart in different menu trees. Consistency - see last point about similar things together. But also the UX is inconsistent. Why should I find the drop down menu to rename a pallet when in other places it is a right click because I'm editing a property of a thing. Another example is some tools/filters are non-destructive whilst others are not. Really disorienting and gives a sense of deep unease and poor confidence. Please don't try to mimic Photoshop - that thing is decades old and there no good reason for emulating it. Beat it by making an app that is intuitive and powerful for newcomers. Your measure of success is how little a manual or online tutorial is needed. I am not a fan of those personas... yet another layer of context shift, when there should be just one layer of context switching maximum. Context depending on context is not good. I've previously mentioned Lightzone (not Lightroom) as a simple but powerful app precisely because it allows the user to do powerful editing, in an intuitive way, totally non-destructively, and the effects you can achieve with it would require many many steps in other apps. Lessons can be learned.
  23. might I be so bold as to bat that back with a question of my own. did you do any user research and testing for you UI .. or was it just what the developers thought would be a good idea?