Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dcrosby

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

271 profile views
  • MEB

  • CLC

  1. Picked up Designer fo $35 a year or so ago. Got Photo for the same price last month. I’ll get Pub at some point after an update or two Regarding the topic. This functionality is sorely needed though I personally don’t miss it much. I’m still pimping CS6 though so not in a hurry... yet. At the risk of sounding like a fanboy I’ll defer to Serif as far as their gameplan. They’ve run a successful graphics software company for 20 or 30 years now which is 20 or 30 years more than I. It’s clear that their goal was to create a graphics suite rather than an “Illustrator killer.” That’s the only reason I’m interested in them. I can’t dump Adobe if I still need 2 or more of their programs. I suspect if they’d spent all their resources making Designer a killer it would still be no more popular than the many programs listed in this thread by critics. If the alternatives were up to snuff I suspect the critics would happily be using them rather than posting on this forum. The Suite is how Adobe captured the market in the first place and is very effective at locking people in now. I actually think their approach to development is brilliant. The workflow between Designer and Photo is a game changer for me and extremely satisfying. The interaction between the apps is revolutionary and can only be understood with all three apps in play. Putting the apps on mobile allows them to compete in a wide open platform that Adobe doesn’t dominate. Look at Adobe announcing vaporware and releasing a half baked Affinity Photo “killer” for the iPad. Look at the reaction from their customers. That’s worth the price of admission all by itself.
  2. I can't speak for all Affinity users but this one is appreciative of your interest and support for our platform of choice.
  3. Thanks Patrick, I'll pass this on.
  4. I use Typeface at home. The interface is quite different than traditional font managers but better in some ways. It activates Affinity apps, scrolls faster, and uses tags rather than folders to organize fonts. All good things. I'm purging old utilities like Suitcase as I purge Adobe from my personal workflow.
  5. That is some valuable and welcome information regarding hyphenation. I just now created the same key-command I'd used in InDesign to ease the process. Thanks a bunch. There is still so much to learn.
  6. After talking up Affinity for the last year or so a friend of mine purchased all three at the recent sale. He's a Mac user but unfortunately he clicked on the Windows version of Publisher by accident. He said he had emailed Serif to try to change out the Windows version to Mac but hadn't heard back. I thought I'd contact you here on the forum to see if changing it would be a problem. I didn't make the mistake but after recommending you I'd hate for him to have an issue right out of the gate. So is changing his purchase of Publisher to a Mac version possible? How would he go about getting this done? Thanks
  7. Hi Walt. I've tried Publisher but not extensively. I'm finding out that the combo and interaction between Photo and Designer fits my needs very well and working with the two is natural and a lot of fun. I'd gladly use Publisher for multipage documents, let's say 8 to 800 pages, or documents that are text heavy requiring linked text boxes and such, or docs where I'm integrating photos, articles and logos from outside sources. That makes perfect sense. At this point I'll only advocate for hyphenation in Designer because a single paragraph of text does not make a document "text heavy" and setting a decent paragraph of text is crippled unto uselessness without it. Once again hyphenation is basic, it's already in the program but made inaccessible unless you send the doc to Publisher first. Serif seems hesitant to potentially cannibalize Publisher sales by adding more text capabilities. I get it, but disallowing hyphenation is just plain trifling and I think they should reconsider.
  8. Happy to hear it's not the preferred behavior. I'll keep the sticky until I hear otherwise and probably do the workaround for years after it's actually fixed, lol.
  9. It takes the content of multiple selected layers and merges them into one layer. That is what I want and should work fine. It's kind of a workaround though in my opinion. If I hadn't needed to move the shape around right after the operation I would have lost data by accident. I'll have to pin a post-it note on my monitor so I don't forget. I wondered if there was a way to merge without cropping.
  10. Working in Photo I have a number of pixel images. I created a vector shape to use as a mask and dragged multiple images under its layer to non destructively crop the images. Works fine. I can move each pixel layer around in the mask to only show within the "window" created by the vector mask. The problem shows up when I selected multiple pixel layers within that mask and "merged selected." At that point the pixel layers cropped themselves to the boundaries of the vector mask which ruins my ability to reposition them within the mask. I'd like to merge them for simplicity but don't want them to get destructively cropped. Did I miss something?
  11. Well thought-out post. Some CS-thinking is good, some is just what we've gotten used to. The workflow between apps that talk to each other on Affinity's level is the most difficult yet exciting part of using the suite, I mean "range". Having a lot of fun with these apps right now. The potential is off the charts.
  12. 15 years ago I would have been the one correcting the spelling Glad it's working for you, if it wasn't for the price and bad memories I might consider using it again.
  13. I gave up Quark Express many years ago, I'm still surprised that nobody ever, ever mentions it as an ID replacement other than the occasional "Are they still in business?"
  14. I thought I was in suitable apps using Designer and Photo until I realized my layout would work better with 2 columns. I chose those apps rather than my Adobe stuff to learn the programs... which I did. I'm a big fan of Affinity and what they're doing. Their success is my success to a great extent. In each app I quickly find one or two processes that I can't accomplish in any Affinity app though, and I end up back in Adobe. I don't have Publisher yet. It's not a mature program yet in my opinion. My page layout program will require a number of features that Publisher doesn't have and I don't have time to futz around. Even $35 on sale is wasted income if I'm not going to use it. I bring this up as honest customer feedback from someone who wishes Affinity well. If using the software requires all three programs it might need to be promoted as such. In the mean time I'm humbly suggesting that a few more text features such as hyphenation and columns would round out the program.
  15. i could probably live without linked text boxes if the columns feature was fairly robust I think. But there is nothing worse than putting hours into a layout in one program and realizing it can't be completed because that software can't go where your ideas took you. Starting all over in a different app is never pleasant.

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.