GarryP

Welcome to the forums @mwatson In general, yes; that’s one of the ‘big things’ about using the Affinity applications. In the forums we often don’t know which OS the documents shared with us were created on. However, you will need to make sure that both machines have exactly the same fonts installed which the document uses (if it uses any), otherwise you could get discrepancies. Also, if you use linked files in the document then you will need to package the document to make sure everything the document needs is copied over between machines. There will also be various other requirements, such as colour management, etc., but the files themselves are compatible between the desktop OSes. Important: There are sometimes problems with using files on network/cloud/external storage, so it’s not generally recommended that you use that sort of thing with the Affinity applications.

Welcome to the forums @klc99 The Studio menu items moved to the Window menu in V2.

I would guess that there may be something wrong with your system/set-up. An update of any Affinity application shouldn’t take much more than a minute or two. (This doesn’t include download time as that can vary much more for various reasons.) Try doing a web search for make machine run faster for some hints and tips on checking if your machine is running optimally. If it's the download time which is the problem then I don't think there's much that Serif can do about that.

Note: You can see how the design will be exported (up to a point) by going to Pixel View Mode. In this case, if you want to get rid of the semi-transparent pixels you can: 1. Remove the Outline Quick Effect; 2. Set the Stroke to Outside and 2px; 3. Change the Blend Options Coverage Map to a flat line. (Put the Coverage Map line at the top of the graph to fill in the whole of the pixels on the corner, as in how you requested earlier.) See attached image.

I think you meant “Ctrl+Alt+Shift+S” to get to the export dialog. Have you tried using the Export Persona instead? Setting the Decimal Places settings to zero will not show any decimal places. If you do as I said earlier, “Try changing the Decimal Places settings to three (or more)” then you should be able to see the decimal places, if there are any. As NotMyFault said above, in this sort of case you probably should be using a Stroke on the Outside rather than the Outline Quick Effect.

Are the pixel values in the Transform Panel actually integers, or do they just look like integers because of rounding? Try changing the Decimal Places settings to three (or more) via Preferences / User Interface and check again. Are there any Quick Effects applied to the parent layer(s) of that layer? When you export that layer, how do you export it? File → Export, or the Export Persona? Note: Full-screen screenshots are often more useful than small screen-grabs as we get more information at the same time.

Welcome to the forums @CesiousBlue It’s not possible to search for a brush by name, but you’re not the first to want to do it. See this request from 2019-21 which is asking for both browse by name and search for name: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/84725-feature-request-view-brushes-by-name/

If the application quits before the save has completed then that would probably cause a problem, but I’ve no idea if that’s possible with the Affinity applications (I would very much hope that it wasn’t). All I can suggest at the moment is to watch for it happening again and, if it does, create a new thread containing as much information about the problem, and what happened prior to the problem, as you can remember.

Welcome to the forums @Koyander Sometimes the layer thumbnails need a little bit of time to update. Also, if you have a thin curve which is large in overall size/length then the curve may not be visible when shrunk down to a thumbnail. Would you be able to share a copy of the document, or maybe one which only contains the layer in question? As for the thumbnail background, use the ‘hamburger menu’ at the top-right of the Layers Panel and choose a background from the Thumbnail Background menu.

In Publisher 2.0.3, I have a document with a page size of 100x100mm at 300DPI. If I then change the DPI to 72 my page is now 416.667x416.667mm. See attached video – V1 first, then 2.0.3. This can’t be right, can it? This doesn’t happen in Publisher V1, nor does it happen in Designer V1 or V2 (haven’t checked Photo). Am I just doing something silly, or am I missing something important? (I did a quick search but couldn’t find anything relevant.) 2023-01-26 09-05-56.mp4

That’s a bit of a weird one. We can see that the document UOM is millimetres by what it says at the top-left of the rulers. We can see that the zoom level is 100% by the document tab information. We can see that the dimensions of the document pages are, by eye, around 100mm by 180mm. However, we can also see that, unless your monitor is absolutely massive, the pages sizes are not what we might expect. (Just to check, you’re not projecting this onto the side of a building are you?) I created my own document with the same page sizes and it looks fine to me – see attached image – so I’m not sure what’s gone wrong for you. If you can supply screen-grabs of all of your Document Setup tabs then that might give us better information. Hopefully someone will come along with the solution.

That’s not something that I have come across but there have been various mentions of the applications hanging since V2 was released. From what I have read in the forums it sounds like V2.0.4 may be coming out soon, so you might want to try installing that when it’s released and see if you have the same problem. If you do still have the same problem with V2.0.4 then I would recommend posting the problem as a new thread so that it doesn’t get mixed up with this unrelated issue.

You're welcome.

Thanks Twolane. Don’t forget about the sequel: (I don’t think there will be a third game in the series.)

Welcome to the forums @Cel01 Have a look at the Tech Specs on the main Affinity website, e.g.: https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/

No you don’t. Just try editing the text while the layer is locked.

Welcome to the forums @ChanelleAllan It’s very nice of you to ask but it’s not a real game. As I said in the first post of the thread: “It’s just an experimental thing, not a real product.” (If it were for a real product then it would probably have been removed by the moderators for breaking the forum rules.)

Ah, from your original post it sounded to me like the problem was that you couldn’t get evenly-spaced lines of text, even though they were evenly-spaced. Oh well, as long as it’s sorted.

You’re welcome; I’m glad it was an easy ‘fix’. (It’s easy not to notice a single menu item when there are lots of them.)

The original seems fine to me, without knowing where the text will be used, as real handwriting can often overlap; it’s down to personal taste of course.

No, that is not what I was suggesting. I suggested to lock the selected Frame Text layer by pressing the lock icon at the top-right of the Layers Panel. I’ve attached a video which shows the process from beginning to end. 2023-01-25 12-25-42.mp4

Welcome to the forums @w8d8s No-one except the Serif staff will know this and they generally don’t tell us users about future changes in functionality, for various good reasons. All we can do is make a request, which has already been done (quite a few times for this specific issue, as you have seen), and then wait and see. There's nothing that anyone outside of Serif can do about this.

Did you try locking the layer via the lock icon at the top-right of the Layers Panel? (You can unlock the layer again by pressing the lock icon on the layer you want to unlock.) Note: I would recommend using more descriptive thread titles so they are more useful to other people when they are searching for similar answers.

Did you try checking menu “View → Show Margins”? Are you in Preview Mode?

Can anyone tell me what the original problem is? I opened the image in Designer and dragged guides to the baseline of each text line (to the lowest points of the lower-case ‘t’s, as much as I could visually) and the space between the baselines, after a quick manual calculation, is the same 52 pixels (give or take a pixel which can be accounted for by various things like rounding and antialiasing). It looks fine to me, so am I missing something about the original problem?