Medical Officer Bones

Have you considered FreeCAD? Also, Blender is now shipping with precise CAD drawing tools (the PDT add-on). The developer behind this addon is an experienced and trained draughtsman as well as a highly qualified mechanical engineer. He and others have been using Blender for serious CAD work. Their intention is to even include a 2d drawing module. https://github.com/Clockmender/Precision-Drawing-Tools/wiki https://clockmender.uk/blender/precision-drawing-tools/

That is basically what smart objects in Photoshop or placeholder layers in PhotoLine achieve. Or comps in After Effects. Would be nice to have smart objects in Photo.

That depends. Vector graphics are often converted to a bitmap at the end for various purposes - and this conversion can result in rather bad quality depending on the rasterization and resampling methods used. For example, Illustrator produced (and still does) rather sub-par lower resolution exported bitmap versions. Compared to Designer, Lunacy/Sketch and other vector editors, the output of an (for example) 240px by 240px icon with simple shapes just looks pretty awful: too soft, and it often introduces pixels at awkward positions which affect the quality of rounded shapes. In short: the base vector-->bitmap conversion in Illustrator is not very acceptable in my opinion. A legacy trick to improve the overall final quality has always been to export a much higher resolution bitmap version and then use another tool (image editor or dedicated optimization tools) to scale the result to the required lower resolution. This results in a much more acceptable lower resolution variant. True often even for other vector applications (Designer, Lunacy, etc.) which already produce (much) better output at the original required low resolution. Rounded corners look visibly more rounded: the base exported low resolution versions often cause slightly too straight looking rounded corners, for example. The resampling method plays a major part in this last step. I tend to stick with Catmull-Rom myself when scaling down vector graphics that are exported as larger bitmaps. That said, really, generally the output of Designer and most other vector apps is fine, and there is no real need to perform that in-between step. Unless, of course, you work with Illustrator But if I have to work with high-resolution bitmap versions of what used to be vector art work, and need to produce lower resolution versions, I always avoid resampling algorithm such as bilinear, bicubic, lanczos, or Mitchell-Netravali. Those result in too soft looking downsampled results. Catmull-Rom or even Box work best in these cases. Catmull-Rom also preserves the most detail in scaling down photos to lower resolutions, by the way (since most software does not support this resampling method, I rely on ColorQuantizer for this last step).

I once had a client refer me to their website (early 2000s) when I requested logo files for a print job 😭 Their response: "Just grab the logo from our website header": a 150px wide anti-aliased pixel mess with unclear lettering.

Yes, I agree. I think Affinity has many nice features, but unfortunately marred by as many paper cuts, such as this one. These are the main reason why Photo is a complementary application for me, not the main image editor in my daily workflow. I remain hopeful, though. 🤞

Ah, yes, I understand what you mean. I've had my fair share of clients sharing bitmap files of their logos with me and lost access to the original files/vectors... Generally it means I have to trace them manually and recreate as vector 🙄 Clients sharing low resolution badly compress jpg bitmap logos embedded in a Word document - good times indeed! 😉

Uhm, no: it is a workflow used for drawings in comics publishing and CAD/technical manuals everywhere. Also quite a bit in academic publications. Last week I tested Publisher's new PDF Passthrough feature: I created a PDF with a 600ppi 1bit image, and placed it in Publisher, expecting it to at least leave the content alone. Right? Placing an external PDF in passthrough mode should NOT change the contents in any way. Much to my surprise it converted the bitmap to a greyscale 300ppi one!!! Even though a 'true' pdf passthrough ought to leave the contents of an existing external placed PDF alone, Publisher happily converted that externally placed PDF's contents! This REALLY needs to be looked at by the Affinity developers.

If you worked with Krita, Gimp, Corel Draw before, than you ought to be aware of default panels like layers and channels. These are generally the first things that I look for in any image editor. They should be, as @fde101 states, visible by default, but for some reason they were turned off in your Affinity Photo workspace. Turn them back on like @fde101 suggests, and things will become more familiar.

Switched to Davinci Resolve a while ago from Premiere. Did not regret it. The base version is free and suffices for general video editing. https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/

Sure, but have you checked the new export preview? It is so rudimentary, that I assume it cannot be anything else BUT a first version. I am quite happy with many of the other improvements, though, in both Photo and Publisher. Haven't looked at Designer yet, because I hardly use it in my work or personally.

I mean: I just tested the latest version of Publisher with a simple 600ppi 1bit drawing. Publisher still misinterprets the correct dimensions it should be placed at, and relies on the document ppi - while it should be interpreting that 600ppi according to the file's native ppi. Which means the 600 ppi drawing is placed at twice the original scale at the document's 300ppi. Twice too large, in effect. Scaling the drawing down by x2, and then exporting to PDF still converts the drawing to a RGB bitmap. Unusable. If they resolve these two things, Publisher and Designer will at least be capable to deal with existing 1bit imagery and properly outputting those PDFs. These are the 'bear' necessities for prepress work, even if Photo will never allow for true 1bit editing. At least it will allow for 1bit image export, as a semi-acceptable workaround solution. Other users (like myself) who need to edit such files regularly will continue to use alternative image editors for this particular task, but they will at least be able to rely on Publisher and Designer to keep the files as-is. The need for placing 1bit high resolution bitmap in Designer and Publisher and output to PDF is non-negotiable, however. Unless Serif is fine with limiting Publisher to an 24bit RGB/CMYK workflow and leave out a pretty big chunk of the publishing market.

All these workarounds are okay for the odd instance that someone must work with 1bit imagery, but not very workable if one has to deal with many 1bit files and edits on a regular basis. For that a native 1bit image mode will have to be implemented, which is never going to happen. Which is fine, because other alternatives exist to handle that situation. The 1bit export is a step in the right direction, although in its current state hardly usable in an efficient 1bit workflow. But I appreciate that the Affinity devs put this on their action list, and this will certainly work much better once they implement a proper preview in export mode. Besides, the point is moot: as long as Designer and Publisher do not support proper placing & processing of 1bit high resolution images while exporting to PDF, there is no easy workaround, except to use an alternative that does provide that option. I expect the devs will have implemented this rather essential option by version 2.

Converting 1200ppi 1bit images to vector is just not a feasible workflow in stressful production scenarios. Aside from the problem that for very detailed line work it produces very heavy and difficult to process vector files, for more detailed inked art work it just can't resolve the details sufficiently. Take comic printing as an example: it is entirely impractical to convert hundreds of pages of line art... And having to check each page for problems. And, as @MikeW pointed out earlier, as long as imported high resolution 1bit artwork isn't even retained in the PDF output, the whole point is moot. The preferred solution is for [1] Affinity Photo to natively support 1bit images at any resolution, and allow these to be edited that way. [2] Publisher and Designer should be able to process them, and output to a PDF. Colorizing should be possible in Designer and Publisher. The developers have already stated that [1] will never be implemented. (I suspect this might be related to them wanting to avoid a complete re-haul of the core processing engine.) Instead, they have seemingly decided to output 1bit images only. Which leaves [2] - and this must be added before Publisher can be fully integrated in many regular prepress conditions and workflows. [2] is absolutely essential for prepress work. Simple as that. No workarounds, no excuses. That said, I am pretty certain the devs are aware of this, and will implement support for this at some point. It should be given top priority after the latest 1.9 release. I agree with @loukash: be software agnostic. If Affinity or other software will not provide what is required to pull off a job without turning upside down and twisting left and right, then switch to other software that can. I still use InDesign for FXL ebook work, because Affinity Publisher lacks this option. Similarly, any 1bit high resolution artwork editing I do in PhotoLine, which is the only image editor that I know of that allows for native 1bit editing AND use layers! Nothing else on the market, including Adobe Photoshop, handles 1bit images that well. Being able to edit layered 1bit images is pretty darn awesome when an important part of my workflow revolves around manipulating 1bit high resolution imagery. 😎 Same for indexed pixel art jobs: Affinity Photo, Photoshop, PhotoLine, and just about any other general image editor out there cannot handle 8-bit (or less) indexed fixed colour palettes with full layer support. Either it is not supported at all (Photo and PhotoLine) or the editing is severely hampered (Photoshop only allows for a single layer in indexed colour mode). Which means I use alternative dedicated pixel art software (ProMotion NG, but there are other options). Anyway, what I am trying to say: the job at hand should, in the end, dictate what tool fits best to handle that job. Endless work-arounds may be helpful in the odd unexpected bind, but are useless and time-consuming if used in a common day-to-day pipeline and workflow. Then it's time to find an alternative solution to fill the gap.

The current preview is not there yet. Developers call this a MVP - Minimal Viable Product. Read up on it here: https://blog.crisp.se/2016/01/25/henrikkniberg/making-sense-of-mvp To use that analogy: users ask for a flying DeLorean, but get a hover board first. It kinda works, users won't exactly be happy about it, but at least it is a functional initial implementation. To me this Preview option in the Export Settings is rather more comparable to a regular skateboard with wheels - barely functional, but it will appease users to wait for the next stage of implementation. Not "quite there yet". At least it's a start, and hopefully by version 2.0 the export persona will have been updated with similar controls as @madonnaragu would like to see (and the rest of us). We will just have to be patient until the devs get to the flying DeLorean stage In the meantime, use ColorQuantizer for near-perfect PNG optimization and more bells and whistles and control than any other software, free or paid! http://x128.ho.ua/color-quantizer.html

OpenToonz/Tahoma2d is highly effective and powerful 2d animation software. It is comparable to ToonBoom Advanced and in some regards ToonBoom Harmony. The built-in compositor is as strong as Harmony. Tahoma2d is a version of OpenToonz with a simpler default GUI setup. Either one is free and open source. It is used in the Japanese animation industry, and even Clip Studio Paint EX includes a direct OpenToonz export option (Clip Studio is not meant for full animation production, while OpenToonz is a full animation studio). As for Adobe Animate: I would avoid it. Flash used to be great, but Adobe's Animate development team has their priorities upside-down, if you ask me. The last production usable and ready version is still Flash CS6, while the later Animate version introduced bug after bug after performance regressions, and more bugs. The bone tools are useless. Every time a new animation feature is introduced, somehow the dev team botched it, and delivered only half-working tools. That said, an old copy of Flash CS6 plus Flanimate (free character animation plugin for Flash/Animate) is a really good combo. Animate's current state is a crying shame, though. Avoid Toonboom Essentials. ToonBoom Advanced and Harmony are the way to go if you decide to go with ToonBoom. Essentials is way too limited in my experience. Besides, OpenToonz wipes the floor with Essentials, and even measures up with Harmony in many regards - for free! Also have a look at Krita, which has nice bitmap-based frame-by-frame animation. It also depends on the type of 2d animation that you are looking for: traditional hand-drawn frame-by-frame? Puppet-based cut-out characters? That makes a world of a difference. Cut-out 2d character animation can be done brilliantly well in not-so obvious software such as Blender and After Effects with the free DUIK plugin, or the dedicated Moho Pro animation app. And do not underestimate Character Animator 4 from Reallusion. It is getting better and better for this type of animation too. To answer your question better, let us know what specific type of animation you are looking for.

Correct, this will work. But you MUST have the same fonts installed on your local computer as the ones which are used in your book, otherwise you will run into issues with your text formatting, i.e., fonts will be replaced.

I would stick with Krita for digital painting. At this point Affinity Photo is missing a number of options which hamper it as a digital painting tool, in particular when compared to Krita. For example, brush management is pretty far behind Krita, Brush control in Photo is light-years behind, a free transform tool is missing (and forget about Krita's really nice transformation tools), the GUI is counter-productive in my opinion (the right-mouse click widget in Krita is hard to beat), no proper canvas rotation unless working on a Mac (an absolute must), colour palette control and selection is not nearly as good, and so on. Which is understandable, since Krita focuses on being a best-in-class digital painting app, while Photo is meant to be a more general image editor. It scores better in that department compared. Photo is great as a compositor, though: use Krita for painting, and Photo for compositing work. My opinion, of course. Photo misses too many features which I rely on in Krita.

Serif would be taking a huge risk: the market is already saturated with excellent 2d and 3d animation software, including professional level free options such as OpenToonz/Tahoma2d. I'd rather have the Affinity developers speed up development of the existing apps, and improve those. Too many paper cuts and missing basic features, which are really mostly low hanging fruits compared to the effort of developing an entirely new 2d animation application.

Two options off the top of my head. 1) OpenToonz / Tahoma2d. I use this for my gif animations. Either import the movie file directly, or convert the movie file to an image sequence and import that. The advantage of image sequences: each image can be separately edited in an external image editor, and I use ColorQuantizer to control the conversion to 8bit images with precise controls for dithering, rare colours threshold, balancing gradients and details. The dither amount is controllable, as well as bypassing edges (preventing edge dithering). With ColorQuantizer I process all images to 8bit or even less colours depending on the source material. Then save as an animated Gif. As an image sequence OpenToonz/Tahoma2d automatically re-imports the adjusted images. Then I export to a Gif animation. It is also possible to render a movie file to images with OpenToonz/Tahoma2d. 2) an alternative option is ScreenToGif. The editor allows for movie import, and converts to image frames. Right-clicking one of the frames enables the user to open the folder with the images (which will all be 24 bit). (1) allows for much more editing control, but is a more complex animation application. (2) is pretty simple, and also includes gif animation controls to define the length of the frames. Both options are free! https://tahoma2d.org/ https://opentoonz.github.io/e/ (Tahoma2d is a simplified GUI version of OpenToonz). https://www.screentogif.com/ http://x128.ho.ua/color-quantizer.html Processing the frames with ColorQuantizer saves typically 50% in terms of file size in combination with OpenToonz/Tahoma2d and the proper output settings. ScreenToGif offers 5 methods to control the Gif anim export (does not support 8bit source images, so I would have to enforce RGB mode for output and use in ScreenToGif).

In the meantime Krita adds Live Mesh Warp to its already excellent complement of live transformation tools (including perspective, warp, liquid, and cage transformations). The implementation is really very good. Perhaps the Affinity devs could have a look at its code for inspiration?

I agree, this is quite useful to have for compositing, VFX, and concept art. PS Luminar 4 and Aurora HDR with many presets are now on sale in a Humble Bundle deal. https://www.humblebundle.com/software/aipowered-photo-editor-with-luminar-4-software

For those interested, PhotoLine added FITS file support in the beta last June. A nice HDR non-destructive adjustment layer with automatic exposure is automatically added for convenience. Could be an alternative until Serif decides to support FITS files in Affinty.

Or fire up a 3d app, and create your 3d metal object. I find that is more effective, and leads to better looking results. Much more freedom too. It took me a few minutes to create these.

SWF is a legacy format. SVG is a good replacement format for vector art import into a game engine. It's on the developers' heads of game engines to support it. GameMaker Studio still insists on the decrepit SWF format to import vector art, which is just plain dumb. Besides, it has all sorts of technical limitations. For example, Unity and Godot will import SVG directly. HTML-based game engines may support it as well, or you use plain vanilla JS with a SVG library to take care of it. But to expect support for SWF export at this point in time? Time to change your workflow.

I have a feeling that Affinity Photo's architecture perhaps complicates the implementation of a true 1bit (and 8bit indexed) mode to such an extent that the devs would have to re-code large swaths of their core code. I don't think they ever anticipated the need for a 1bit mode architecture, and patching the current code base is probably a really bad idea. And to be fair, it does present a new set of novel problems: how do you deal with transparency? Layers? How will those layers with different bit depths interact? For example, in Photoshop most of the functionality is simply turned off. No layers, no blending, most filters are greyed out and unavailable. Same in indexed mode. PhotoLine is completely unique in that it allows the user to actually keep using layers, vector layers, blend modes, layer masks and effects, but many effects and blend modes have no effect in 1bit mode, and layer masks still allow for grey values, which potentially can lead to issues. So in PhotoLine's case the responsibility lies entirely with the user to avoid making mistakes. Photoshop and PhotoLine represent in my mind two extremes in how to tackle the implementation of a 1bit mode: either limit the user's freedom when working in 1bit mode, or allow full freedom, but with that freedom comes the user's responsibility to avoid using features that might break the 1bit workflow. For an experienced user or expert PhotoLine is a revelation when working with 1bit graphics. For a novice a potential minefield, and Photoshop's hand-holding probably a better approach. And if an 8bit indexed bitmap mode is required in your workflow: even PhotoLine avoids opening that tin can of worms. I would argue it is preferable to switch to a dedicated 8bit (pixel art) image editor, such as Pro Motion NG, because of an entire new set of requirements. All of which returns us to the need of 1bit support in Affinity products. For many print/textile professionals it is an absolute requirement. If the Affinity devs could integrate 1bit in the export persona, fix the custom 8bit palette option (which has never worked), for heaven's sake implement a proper real-time preview in the export persona, as well as make sure Publisher (and Photo and Designer) deal with 1bit images properly in the PDF export and keep the original higher resolution, then Serif may perhaps at the very least provide a feasible 1bit workflow.