Max N

The problem appeared with the version 1.7.0333. Perhaps one version before. There is no problem in the stable version.

The x and z axes have a different origin. The planes are offset from each other. Isometric drawing is impossible, if only every time not to move the entire image. Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

1. item is still relevant.

I create a layer → I create a mask → I fill it → I add an adjustment layer = the adjustment layer does not affect the lower layers. I create a layer → I fill it → I create a mask → I add a correction layer = A correction layer affects the layers. Is this a problem or should it be?

After PS, this logic explodes the brain. I am used to grouping work stages into groups so that you can easily see the result or go back to the stage below. It is necessary to understand why this is done in the AP and how it can be used.

Adjustment layers do not work after grouping.

I reset the program settings. It all worked.

The brush does not draw in the mask. Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

The same file opened in PS and AP. 1. Layer with original image 2. Curve 3. Levels 4. Duplicate black mask layer 5. Vector rectangle shape (with visibility disabled) I think this is a good result.

I think so too.

2. There are no questions to .afphoto. It is normal that their size increases in comparison with Jpeg. 1. Yes, if this is fixed, it will be fine. And if you add a quality selection dialog box (so that the user can specify the right one himself) it will be absolutely good. And if the output window of the quality settings will be selected by the user in the global settings of the program [X] Keep in original quality (Do not ask when saving) [ ] User settings (Ask user when saving)

When I draw a curve without a pen fill, I see it. When I draw a curve with a pencil, I don’t see it. Baseline data alone, the behavior is different.

The difference is noticeable at high resolution. I used the file 5472x3648 px. The AP saves the default 100% quality settings.

Artifacts when zooming and working with the curve. 3.afdesign

White line between fill and stroke. A document with a history attached. 2.afdesign

According to my assumptions, the user indicates that he does not want the line to have a stroke after it is drawn, and not that he should not see what he is drawing. Perhaps the line is needed in order to start the text along it. Then I don't need a stroke, but I need to see what I draw. Drawing a line with a stroke first, and then deleting a stroke does not look very logical, in my opinion.

Maybe I'm wrong. I do not work much in AD, and could not imagine a situation where I would like to draw blindly.

1. In the folder I create two identical files 1179 Kb 2. Open the file 2.jpg 3. I change one pixel of the image. 4. Press Ctrl + S 5. I receive a file weighing 7236 Kb (7236/1179 = 6.13 ...) The file size has increased 6 times! I prepared the file for uploading to the site and I needed to make a minor change. I can't use fast save 1. Ctrl + S Total: 1 second. To just save the file I have to 1. Ctrl + Alt + Shift + S 2. Choose a format 3. Choose quality 4. Set the location and save the file. Total: 15-30 seconds. Formally, there is a quick save tool, but I cannot use it. I can offer several options on how to make the tool more usable. In the global settings of the program, the user selects the toolkit itself. 1. Keep in original quality (as original) 2. As specified by the user as - (field for entering quality) 3. With each save, display a dialog box in which the user himself will set the quality. 4. Save to the highest possible quality (with increasing file size). The tool will work as the user needs. And the user will be happy as this cast

This is the industry standard and deviation from it. My specialty is automation technology engineering. I well understand that the loss of 10 seconds in the operation does not look scary. But within the framework of the technological process, the operation can be repeated millions of times, and this is no longer 10 seconds of losses. AP is a replacement for the PS (industry standard). In many ways, AP is superior to PS. But there are little things that can slow down the process and I pay attention to them. Perhaps this is obvious to me as a result of my education. Perhaps for the average user is not so obvious. I sincerely wish that the AP would develop and become better, so that new users (during the test period) were faced with a minimum amount of inconvenience, and saw more advantages. Then the market share of AP will grow and, with time, the AP will significantly push PS.

Pressure curve. The point is spontaneously selected. 1.afdesign

Different reaction to the lack of stroke in the pencil and pen tool. If you do not select the fill, during drawing you don’t see what you draw. After the drawing is finished, the curve turns blue. It would be correct if the curve in the process of drawing was already painted in blue.

Imagine if windows would add to the folder name that it is a folder with files. Which option will be more convenient? Top or bottom? Here the user who switched from PS to AP sees the same picture. It is not necessary to write on the folder that this folder, on the archive in the title, too, it is not necessary to write that it is an archive. This is obvious in understanding and inconvenient in perception ..

Right, points. When I opened the AP for the first time and saw this ... Why do I need so much obvious information? When you see one word, it is clear that this layer is immediately. When you see a sentence, you have to ponder it, read. And when there are a lot of layers with long names, it becomes hard to find the right one. It's like on the door handle of the car the inscription "this is a door knob" seems to be true, but why do I need it? This information is obvious, does not carry additional semantic load. When we choose from the drop-down menu from short names, then we understand everything. The long name in the layers panel only brings in some visual chaos. Short layer names look neater, while remaining equally understandable and functional.

"коррекция" and "корректировка" - translated correctly. So it should be. But these words are superfluous. They do not carry (important) semantic load, but they visually overload the interface.

In order not to create another topic, post here.