Medical Officer Bones

Pretty much agree with almost everything. And 99% has been discussed before. Just to note here that Photoshop's curves aren't perfect either. Photoshop restricts moves to the current image mode only (Affinity Photo and PhotoLine are two examples of image editors that do not enforce this and allow users to work in LAB mode even when the image mode is RGB, for example). This is one reason why I left Photoshop many years ago. Photoshop is incredibly restrictive in regard to image mode and adjustments. But yeah: Affinity's curve adjustment dialog and functionality is rather half-baked. And Photoshop's TINY curve window has become almost unusable on larger highdef screens for myself. PhotoLine and Gimp allow the curve window to be scaled as large as the user requires without limitations. This is actually a much requested GUI improvement that still isn't implemented even after years and years of PS users complaining. But yeah, I hear you. My own experience with Affinity Photo: excellent first impressions, yet when digging a little deeper it's a case of "death by a million paper cuts".

I forgot about Squoosh! https://squoosh.app/editor While Squoosh is an online tool, an offline version can be run in a local web server (such as Mamp or Wamp) easily. What's to like: Nicely organized dialog. Settings collapse and open depending on the controls needed. With advanced settings open for certain formats it can become a tad overwhelming, though. sliding door preview works quite well. In the lead for modern web file format support: WebP and Avif, as well as Qoi (https://qoiformat.org/) . JPEG XL, MozJPG, Super! PNG 8bit indexed export with support for full transparency! Nice transparent edge anti-aliasing even with indexed PNG export. Just works as it should. Good transparency controls. Outstanding advanced settings control over Avif and WebP. Great control over MozJPG. good preview. Pixel precise and smoothed out for preview purposes. WYSIWYG good info about expected exported file size colour palette limit control up to 256 expected (and outdated) entries. built-in image resizing. Of note: shown side-by-side with full rez original for comparison. resizing is supported and modern resampling algorithms such as CatmullRom and MitchellNetravali are available. Nice. CR is excellent for downscaling images and maintaining details. outstanding modern file compression and optimization results with deep control over the final result. separate alpha channel compression control options (for Avif / Webp). can be called from batch function in PhotoLine for mass conversion of files. free and open source! What's not to like: Requires a web server to operate and running it locally takes more effort and knowledge. Only 1 preview window. No custom colour palette control. PNG export options underwhelming (to say the very least). It's treated like a legacy file format in Squoosh! No Gif export (may not be a disadvantage, though: it is superseded by PNG). browser JPG export options limited to quality and "High Quality" --> probably chroma subsampling on/off. Not much else here to see. (MozJPG fares much better) No custom dithering techniques. No colour management. No meta data supported. Isolated utility that doesn't integrate that well with other apps. At the forefront of modern web file format export. Compromising on legacy and classic file formats, however.

I develop web stuff and games. Custom palette control is super important to me as well. Another reason why I cannot use Affinity for this type of work. Nor is the export quality there anyway. So I am a bit of a nitpicker, and prefer Color Quantizer or PhotoLine for this, in combination with Pro Motion NG (dedicated pixel art editor). Cheers!

Oh, I agree with you. New tech isn't necessarily better than what went before or it just complicates for the sake of complexity. But not always, of course. It depends on the context and the job at hand. I myself started out in web dev building page layouts with <table> tags and no CSS back in the noughties. That is one time I am happy to have long left behind me, though. Remember the spacer gifs to maintain layout height and such ? No, I am perfectly happy with the layout grid in CSS. Prefer it over flexbox for most work as well. Also simple to build grid-based layouts in CSS grid. Lynx! Yes, I use Lynx because it is still a nice browser to check accessibility in for the visually impaired. That said, stubbornly sticking to old tek for its own sake? Therein lies the other side of the same coin to merely following the latest fad because others do. My opinion is that when a better solution exists which is also more efficient, then I will make the switch (if I can). Again, though: it all depends on the context. That is not entirely true: an excellent after-the-fact compressor with visual controls (a super-charged external Save For Web utility of sorts) actually exists. That tool is Color Quantizer. It is, in my mind and experience, the best PNG optimizer that exists. Let's have some fun and compare web export dialogs and features! 🙂 Fireworks Let's start with the great grand parent of them all: Fireworks! Fireworks was way ahead at its time for web graphics optimization. It still is in some ways. What's to like: that awesome integrated web export view. No external Save For Web dialog here: it's a seamless part of Firework's core workflow. When I first checked out Affinity, I rejoiced that they integrated a similar export persona. ...Only to be severely disappointed. 😞 More about that below. PNG 8bit indexed export with support for full transparency! This is where the Photoshop & Affinity devs get it utterly wrong. full custom colour palette control. Load custom colour palettes. Excellent for fine control over each colour entry and each colour can be edited individually. JPG export with selective quality! Preserve text quality, for example. I haven't seen this anywhere else, I believe. great preview. Up to 4 versions on-screen. Pixel precise. WYSIWYG nice to have BMP export as well. good info about expected exported file size save and load colour palettes. What's not to like: Fireworks is dead, dead, dead. No longer updated. So no support for webp, avif, or improved compression algorithms. little or no precise control over alpha or other compression options (such as JPG). For example, chroma subsampling (jpg), ... complete lack of dithering techniques. Photoshop Pattern dither method rules for many a job. No colour management options. No meta data options. anti-aliasing leaves a lot to be desired. Lack of edge control. Dithering affects edges badly. built-in resizing/resampling methods very limited. No CatmulRom, for example. doesn't compress all too well compared to modern solutions. Photoshop So, how about Photoshop? Two base options (aside from generator). First, classic deprecated SFW: What's to like: the dialog is nicely organized. No support for side-by-side, though, it seems. full custom colour palette control. Load custom colour palettes. Excellent for fine control over each colour entry and each colour can be edited individually. a few dithering techniques, but Pattern is the one to have for colour reduction if you need it. great preview. Up to 4 versions on-screen. Pixel precise. WYSIWYG nice to have WBMP export as well. good info about expected exported file size built-in image resizing. slicing support for those who still need it. animation controls for animated Gif. save and load colour palettes. can be called from batch function in Photoshop for mass conversion of files. What's not to like: PNG 8bit indexed export lacks support for full transparency! Absolutely essential to have for PNG export. Just for this unsupported option I myself (and many others) cannot rely on classic SFW. It limits the usage context too much. SFW is dead, dead, dead. No longer updated. Deprecated. It will be removed in a future Photoshop version. So no support for webp, avif, or improved compression algorithms. little or no precise control over alpha or other compression options (such as JPG). For example, chroma subsampling (jpg), etc. anti-aliasing leaves a lot to be desired. Lack of edge control. built-in resizing/resampling methods very limited. No CatmulRom, for example. no animated PNG support. doesn't compress all too well compared to modern solutions. No direct preview option to compare between the original version and the optimized version in-situ. Only side-by-side. No actions support. And what about Photoshop's new export dialog? What's to like: the dialog is nicely organized. Only a 2-up view, though. Multiple exported versions supported (@1x, @2x, etc.) to accommodate modern workflows a few dithering techniques, but Pattern is the one to have for colour reduction if you need it. good preview. Up to 2 versions on-screen. Pixel precise. WYSIWYG good info about expected exported file size built-in image resizing. compression results in smaller more optimized files compared to the older SFW. To be expected, since it is node-js based and makes use of external open source optimization tools. colour management supported. Meta data supported. can be called from batch function in Photoshop for mass conversion of files. What's not to like: Unbelievable, but true! PNG 8bit indexed export lacks support for full transparency! Absolutely essential to have for PNG export. (This has an interesting backstory: up to a few versions ago the new export in PS actually DID export these. Then the devs decided to REMOVE ("correct") this "faulty" behaviour, because when these exported 8bit indexed PNG files with full alpha were opened in Photoshop, they would open in RGB/8bit image mode, rather than the "expected" indexed colours mode! So developers being developers, the PS team decided to "fix" this abhorrent behaviour, and leaving tens of thousands of PS users with a broken workflow...) Just for this unsupported option I myself (and many others) cannot rely on classic SFW. It limits the usage context too much. Unbelievable, but true! No support for webp! And obviously no Avif either. That would be asking for too much, hey? little or no precise control over alpha or other compression options (such as JPG). For example, chroma subsampling (jpg), etc. No indexed colour palette control whatsoever. Not even an option to choose a custom palette. anti-aliasing leaves a lot to be desired. Lack of edge control. built-in resizing/resampling methods very limited. No CatmulRom, for example. no animated PNG support. No direct preview option to compare between the original version and the optimized version in-situ. Only side-by-side. No actions support All in all, Photoshop's new export dialog only disappoints. Essential functionality is missing. It's frustrating. PhotoLine Next, let's throw in a dark horse: PhotoLine. Aside from the web export dialog, it also supports a Generator workflow and a modern multiple exported versions workflow (albeit without a direct preview). What's to like: the dialog is clutter-free, and supports up to 2 export view to compare with the original. PNG and GIF colour palette controls are hidden behind a separate dialog, for better or for worse. Doesn't look as nice as the competition. Supports PNG, GIF, JPG, and modern WebP and Avif formats out-of-the-box. Super! PNG 8bit indexed export with support for full transparency! This is where the Photoshop & Affinity devs get it utterly wrong. full custom colour palette control. Load custom colour palettes. Excellent for fine control over each colour entry and each colour can be edited individually. Nice transparent edge anti-aliasing even with indexed PNG export. Just works as it should. Good transparency controls. Large range of dithering techniques, but PS Pattern is the one missing, however. good preview. Up to 3 versions on-screen. Pixel precise. WYSIWYG good info about expected exported file size colour palette limit control beyond the classic (and outdated) 256 expected entries. Set it to 512, 1024, 2048, custom # of entries, ... built-in image resizing through actions. Actions provide in a very flexible and adaptable automated workflow for export finishing. resizing through actions supports modern resampling algorithms such as CatmullRom and MitchellNetravali. Nice. CR is excellent for downscaling images and maintaining details. good modern file compression and optimization results. colour management supported. Meta data supported. export to clipboard option (a small thing, but quite convenient) save and load colour palettes. can be called from batch function in PhotoLine for mass conversion of files. What's not to like: little or no precise control over alpha or other compression options (such as JPG). For example, chroma subsampling (jpg), etc. JPG export options limited to quality and "High Quality" --> probably chroma subsampling on/off. Not much else here to see. dialog does not support animation export (it is possible to do this via regular export). Awkward, though. No direct preview option to compare between the original version and the optimized version in-situ. Only side-by-side. not integrated with the new export panel. It should be. All in all, excellent modern Save for Web alternative for the average user and even great palette control options. Color Quantizer CQ is a dedicated stand-alone web optimization tool that specializes in PNG export, but does export JPG, WebP, Gif, BMP, and TGA. What's to like: the dialog is clutter-free, but lacks a 2-up or more preview to compare with the original. But CQ takes a different approach: clicking on the preview displays the original. Personally I prefer this method, because it allows for direct comparison of even small changes. But a separate second view would be useful nonetheless and is missed at times. Supports PNG, GIF, JPG, and modern WebP formats out-of-the-box. Super! PNG 8bit indexed export with support for full transparency! This is where the Photoshop & Affinity devs get it utterly wrong. full custom colour palette control. Load custom colour palettes. Excellent for fine control over each colour entry and each colour can be edited individually. Built-in local quality brush tool to control quality on an (almost) per-pixel level. Outstanding control over localized quality. Outstanding transparent edge anti-aliasing even with indexed PNG export. Just works as it should. Brilliant transparency controls. The user can go as deep as they need. Even support for premultiplied (or not) alpha edge control. built-in image resizing is outstanding with a wide range of resampling methods. Worth it for this feature alone if downscaling quality is important. colour palette limit control beyond the classic (and outdated) 256 expected entries. Set it to 512, 1024, 2048, custom # of entries, ... automated alpha/colour background cropping. Scale to pixels content. canvas resize option. Brilliant range of useful dithering techniques, including the all-important PS Pattern! Delicate and by-pass Edge dithering options. No more ugly dithered edges! good preview. Pixel precise. WYSIWYG good info about expected exported file size Direct preview option to compare between the original version and the optimized version in-situ. Excellent (PNG: outstanding) modern file compression and optimization results. Excellent JPG compression options: chroma subsampling, chroma quality, colour space, and various JPG tables. Support for BMP and TGA option to save an RGB/8bit PNG even when outputting an indexed PNG. Useful for those applications that do not support 8bit indexed PNG files. copy and paste to clipboard with standard shortcuts (a small thing, but quite convenient) save and load colour palettes. can be integrated with other design software. For example, PhotoLine's external app link works just fine. If your software can send a file to another app, CQ will fit right in your pipeline. Allows anyone to visually achieve brilliant compression vs quality settings for PNG without the need of the command line and multiple obscure CMD tools. What's not to like: only one preview. No side-by-side. no Avif support requires deeper technical knowledge to really appreciate some of the more technical features. Mostly aimed at controlling indexed colours level optimization techniques. Too deep for most, probably. GUI looks old-fashioned. no colour management supported. No meta data supported. JPG export options hidden behind export dialog and not exposed in core interface. Still does affect the preview directly in realtime before committing, though Webp export options very limited. No animation support. dialog does not support animation export (it is possible to do this via regular export). Awkward, though. No MAC version!!! NOOOSK! (will work in WINE) The pen-ultimate indexed colour reduction compression tool. But depending on the context, perhaps a tad overkill for the average user... Great for (game) developers. And those wanting to push the last drop of image compression out of PNG files while preserving quality, for example. Affinity The big moment is here! At last I give you the two options in Affinity: The Export dialog. What's to like: Nicely organized dialog. All available file formats at our fingertips. JPG, GIF, PNG, and WebP. And others, which is great! Good basic controls over optimization settings. Indexed colour palette control up to a point. See below for caveats. Hardly usable, though. reasonable info about expected exported file size compression results in smaller more optimized files compared to the older PS SFW. colour management supported. Meta data supported. can be called from batch function in Photoshop for mass conversion of files. What's not to like: Preview option limited to a single view. No comparison possible. Critical issue: the view is filtered, and does not provide in a pixel-precise WYSIWYG view. Other issues are the lack of view controls, and other basic usability problems. This preview is rendered useless because of these issues. Unbelievable, but true! PNG 8bit indexed export lacks support for full transparency! Absolutely essential to have for PNG export. Just for this unsupported option I myself (and many others) cannot rely on this export option. It limits the usage context too much. No support for Avif. little or no precise control over alpha or other compression options (such as JPG). For example, chroma subsampling (jpg), etc. Custom colour palette control is not possible and still broken after all these years. Disappointing. anti-aliasing leaves a lot to be desired. Lack of edge control. No built-in resizing and resampling methods limited. No CatmulRom, for example. No actions. no animation support. No direct preview option to compare between the original version and the optimized version. As it stands, not quite workable yet. I have not included the Export persona here, simply because it doesn't allow for a realtime preview while changing the optimization settings. So... This has been an interesting comparison, and I had nothing else to do this afternoon, so here is a simple recommendation for the Affinity devs. If Affinity would have turn the Export persona into a clone of Fireworks' 2/3/4-up view with a pixel precise realtime preview and allow for 8bit indexed PNG files to be exported with full alpha transparency, they could be on to a winner. As it stands, however, as far as "Save for Web" dialogs go, PhotoLine's SFW dialog tentatively takes the crown for now. Color Quantizer is brilliant as far as it goes, but too niche for most users. Again, the ONLY thing the Affinity devs have to achieve to turn the winds in their favour, is simply expand the export persona with a good preview and add that indexed PNG option. Improve the indexed palette edge anti-aliasing. That's really it. Then allow for actions to be hooked into the export, and voila: perfect export persona. The batch builder is already in place with version export options. And fix that custom indexed palette option, or simply remove it if the devs have no interest in it. Oh, and Avif support would be nice too.

I agree that the export (to web) is in a sad state in Affinity. Although I do have to also wonder why you still use Photoshop's ancient deprecated SFW ? no webp export no avif export no fully transparent 8 bit indexed PNG export (and even the new export option in Photoshop was "improved" to no longer allow this for the most obscure reason) severely outdated compression algorithms for both jpg and png lackluster limited down-sampling algorithms ...and other issues. Of course, no-one should be using GIF for static images anymore (nor for web animations, if it can be helped) for obvious reasons. Nonetheless, export in Affinity is in serious need of an update.

@Aldus I truly do not understand why the developers would consider implementing FXL epub export over reflowable epub export. FXL epub is a terrible flaky, fragile and failed ebook format that is only somewhat usable for picture kid's books on iPads. And even then support for FXL epub books is just not there on Windows, Linux, or Android. Only 1 viewer supports FXL epubs on those platforms (Thorium, which still has a few issues with InDesign's FXL epubs) and the average user will not install a third-party reader just to be able to view those properly. Reflowable epub export is what they should be focusing on. That's where the market for ebooks is. Even LibreOffice does a proper job exporting these. Wow. If this is true, they are sadly missing the mark by a mile.

I'd argue that manually installing Python and genAI tools would be an expert user case. Installing Krita and setting up the plugin is following a few simple steps, though, which the average user (dislike that term, btw) shouldn't have any problems with. Here is a quick video.

@gsakes As an alternative, Krita with its free genAI plugin actually does a better job than Adobe's genAI with more options and without censorship for free. Copy from Affinity Photo to Krita, do your genAI stuff, and paste back into Affinity. Simple enough. Only drawback: a reasonable CUDA GPU works best, but it also works (albeit slower) on MacMx machines. Speaking of: a new version was released yesterday! 🙂 https://github.com/Acly/krita-ai-diffusion

Export to PSD then? Import into After Effects as a composition, retain layer sizes. Vector shapes are maintained as vector shapes, and a nice layered comp stands ready for further editing and animation in AE.

Met "origineel bronbestand" bedoel ik het originele Affinity bestand - je ontwerp. Dus het *.affinity bestand. In principe wordt het geëxporteerde PDF bestand nooit direct bewerkt om daarna weer op te slaan als PDF (tenzij we geen toegang hebben tot het originele bronbestand of we als drukker (bijv) aanpassingen moeten maken - maar ook dat is geen goede workflow). Die vraag heeft @Oufti al beantwoordt: u opent het originele affinity bestand en past de transparantie aan. Doe dit echter niet in de geëxporteerde PDF die u opende in Affinity Designer om naar eventuele transparantieafvlakking problemen te zoeken. Altijd de potentiële problemen in het originele bronbestand oplossen. Nooit achteraf in de PDF (indien mogelijk). PDF is bedoeld als finaal exportbestand. Zoals @Oufti schreef en liet zien. @Oufti maakte een kleine fout door te impliceren dat men deze stap in het uiteindelijke PDF bestand uitvoert. Dat is niet het geval: werk altijd in uw originele Affinity/InDesign/Illiustrator/PhotoLine/VectorStyler/en-zo-verder-bestand om eventuele problemen met transparantieafvlakking, kleur en inhoud op te lossen. Dus de workflow is: [A] ontwerp uw layout in de desbetreffende ontwerpsoftware. [B] wees tijdens het ontwerpproces al bewust van mogelijk transparantieproblemen. Dit vereist ervaring, hoewel bepaalde zaken voor de hand liggen: bijvoorbeeld door direct transparantie toepassen op letters ipv met een volle kleur te werken. [C] wanneer het ontwerp klaar is om af te drukken: exporteer een PDF/X-1a bestand. [D] open dit bestand in een PDF editor zoals PDF-Xchange Editor of Acrobat Pro. Bij gebrek aan een PDF editor kan ook ontwerpsoftware die PDF bestanden opent worden gebruikt, bijv. Affinity Designer of PhotoLine. [E] check de PDF op eventuele transparantieafvlakking problemen. Noteer die. Bekijk ook of de PDF correct is ingesteld op afloop (bleed), dat alle objecten die de paginarand raken in de afloop zijn gezet, op druktekens, en zo verder. [F] als u een probleem constateert: wissel naar het originele Affinity bestand om het desbetreffende probleem op te lossen. [G] los zo elk probleem op: check de PDF, keer terug naar het originele bronbestand om problemen op te lossen. [H] wanneer alle problemen zijn opgelost: genereer een nieuwe PDF. [I] bekijk die PDF opnieuw. Lijkt alles okay te zijn? Dan de laatste stappen: [J] stuur de PDF naar de drukker. Laat de drukker een drukproef maken en onderzoek die op mogelijke problemen die tijdens de druk kunnen ontstaan. [K] als er kleur of andere problemen zijn met de drukproef: bespreek met de drukker en corrigeer deze. Afhankelijk van de drukproefproblemen zullen deze zowel door de drukker en/of door de ontwerper moeten worden opgelost. [L] indien u als ontwerper nog problemen moest oplossen: corrigeer deze, exporteer een nieuwe PDF en laat weer een drukproef maken. [M] Ga terug naar stap K indien nog meer problemen moeten worden gecorrigeerd. Als alles in orde lijkt te zijn: go print!

Een eenvoudig voorbeeld: ik opende een PDF die ik had geëxporteerd in Affinity Designer. Een van de teksten die ik had geconverteerd naar vector outlines bleek gerasterd te zijn (dat is te zien aan het laagtype en bij het inzoomen worden pixels duidelijk zichtbaar). Ik opende het originele bronbestand, en dat ene tekstobject had per abuis een transparantie van 98%. Dus eenvoudig op te lossen door de transparantie te verwijderen en de laag op 100% in te stellen. Nog een voorbeeld: een schaduw gemaakt met laageffecten raakt een van de tekst objecten en de tekst is gedeeltelijk gesplitst in een gerasterd deel en een vector deel. Ook dit is meteen duidelijk door de lagen te bekijken in de PDF en verder in te zoomen. Een mogelijke oplossing is dan ervoor te zorgen dat de tekstlagen boven op de schaduw komen te liggen in plaats van andersom in het bronbestand. Dat zijn enkele voorbeelden van typische transparantieafvlakking situaties... Het zou inderdaad handig zijn als Affinity een soortgelijke functionaliteit zou implementeren zoals die in InDesign om transparantieafvlakking direct in het bronbestand aan te duiden en de gebruiker te waarschuwen. Maar dat is helaas (nog) niet het geval.

Wanneer je een PDF exporteert met de standaard PDF/X-1a worden alle vector objecten die semi-transparant zijn en raster (bitmap) objecten raken geconverteert naar raster. Het PDF voorbeeldbestand dat u @AB-Netherlands heeft bijgevoegd is in het geheel als een groot JPG bestand in de PDF opgeslagen. De tekst is afgevlakt en deel van het JPG bestand nu. En dat dient te worden vermeden, want het degradeert de kwaliteit van de tekst behoorlijk. Idealiter zorgen we ervoor dat wij de de tekst omzetten naar vectors (om problemen met fonts te vermijden) en dat de vectors ook inderdaad vector blijven om de hoogste drukkwaliteit te garanderen. Transparantieafvlakking kan nogal wat hoofdbrekens bezorgen voor de RIP software bij drukmachines. En de RIP software verschilt per drukmachine fabrikant. En daarbij komt ook nog eens dat de operator van de RIP de kennis in huis moet hebben om transparanties in een PDF correct af te vlakken in-RIP. Dat is dan ook de reden waarom uw drukker vraagt om een PDF/X-1a PDF bestand: want dat verlegt de verantwoordelijkheid hiervoor bij de klant. Bij u @AB-Netherlands dus! 🙂 Voor alle duidelijkheid: op het moment dat we een PDF/X-1a PDF exporteren in ontwerpsoftware worden alle transparante objecten gerasterd (omgezet naar een bitmap). Als we een PDF/X-4 bestand exporteren blijft de transparantie behouden voor alle objecten en daarmee moet de drukker aan de slag om die afvlakking te regelen in hun RIP software. In het ideale geval voorkomt de ontwerper dat er transparantie wordt gebruikt in het ontwerp. Natuurlijk is dat vaak niet in de praktijk mogelijk. Er zijn dan een aantal mogelijkheden: [1] blindelings vertrouwen op de PDF/X-1a export en maar hopen dat het goed komt. Niet ideaal, natuurlijk. [2] zelf de transparantieafvlakking controleren en uitvoeren. Ik geef zelf bijna altijd de voorkeur aan [2]. Sla uw bestand op als een nieuwe versie voordat u met dit proces aanvangt. In InDesign en Illustrator heeft de gebruiker toegang tot een transparantieafvlakking preview. Dat is niet beschikbaar in Affinity. Ikzelf exporteer als PDF/X-1 en bekijk dan de conversie in PDF-XChange Editor. Dan vlak/raster ik de betreffende objecten zelf. Het is ook mogelijk om de PDF in Affinity Designer te openen en te controleren. Vaak is het vrij eenvoudig om de problematische plekken te identificeren in een ontwerp. In uw omslag zou alle tekst gewoon vector moeten blijven tijdens de PDF export zolang er geen transparantie is gebruikt op de letters zelf. De slagschaduw heeft enkel invloed op de achtergrond, dus de letters blijven vector in dit geval en de slagschaduwen worden in de achtergrond afgevlakt. De achtergrondobjecten --als de achtergrond al bestaat uit meerdere objecten-- moet worden afgevlakt voor de PDF export. Dat betekent in de praktijk dat we die achtergrondlagen samenvoegen. En voordat u een PDF exporteert moet u de tekstobjecten converteren naar vector om eventuele problemen met lettertypen te voorkomen. In het PDF export dialoogvenster moet u er op letten om JPG uit te zetten. Anders zal Affinity de achtergrond als lossy JPG opslaan in het PDF bestand. Dan kiest u de PDF/X-1a standaard, en exporteert u. Dan weer even controleren in PDF-Xchange Editor of Affinity Designer. Deze aanpak levert uiteindelijk een goed afdrukbare PDF op. (Kleuren zijn weer een andere topic!!!) PS Hoe meer transparante effecten worden toegepast in een ontwerp, hoe meer er moet worden afgevlakt. Als een slagschaduw een deel van een tekst raakt, dan zal een deel van die tekst moeten worden omgezet naar raster. En als er IETS lelijk oogt is het wel een tekst die deels raster en deels vector is. Dat moet ten alle tijden worden vermeden. In die gevallen geef ik vaak de voorkeur om de tekst als geheel te rasteren. Maar het hangt af van de rest van de tekstlayout. Ik probeer dit soort situaties altijd te vermijden. Als er aanzienlijk grote semi-transparante verlopen worden ingezet, en legio andere transparante effecten, etcetera, dan kan het soms eenvoudiger zijn om gewoon de hele pagina te rasteren. PS2 Ik werk samen met een drukker die een goed vakman is. Wij werken al een langere tijd samen en hem stuur ik een PDF/X-4 bestand, en hij weet hoe die bestanden netjes af te drukken. Het geeft hem ook meer flexibiliteit afhankelijk van de druk context (grootformaat, digitale print, offset, etc.). Maar zelfs dan zorg ik er ALTIJD voor dat tekst is omgezet naar vectoren, en dat ik geen RGB kleurruimtes gebruik in combinatie met CMYK. Een bekend probleem is bijvoorbeeld om met CMYK vector objecten te werken in de achtergrond, en dan RGB PNG lagen met transparantie te werken op de voorgrond. Afhankelijk van de RIP software (en de kennis van de drukker) weet de RIP niet goed om te gaan met de afvlakking in dat geval - en kleurafwijkingen zoals in de eerste post zijn dan het resultaat. Dus is het een goed idee om het mixen van RGB en CMYK kleuren en transparantie te vermijden...

I played that too! ... I remember that characters could also mess up the game and make it impossible to complete

Why not use Krita in tandem with Affinity then? Krita's free AI plugin does all that without the arbitrary limitations that Adobe put in place. And no reliance on external servers. Also the option to extend with additional AI models and loras from civitai. https://github.com/Acly/krita-ai-diffusion I do not use AI much, but I found it a great alternative to Adobe's generative AI features. Copy from Affinity into Krita, do the AI stuff, and copy back into Affinity. Quick and effective. And free! No subscription, no Firefly "credits".

Import the DXF file and ensure the sanitize option is selected. This will create layer groups. Best practice then is to select a component and merge the curves into one curve object. (right-mouse click --> Geometry --> Merge Curves Ideally the final step would be to optimize the curves to reconnect the separate curve segments, but I am unsure if Affinity Designer offers this option.