Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About LionelD

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

519 profile views
  1. @Callum, thanks for your response. I’d like to continue this discussion. These comments describe behavior on my iPad after updating both Designer and Photo earlier today. I’d just like to note that when I built the file I uploaded, I was aware that the behavior might have been a consequence of something I did in building my brushes. That’s the reason I added the “Other Brushes” artboard. My question 1 - Scale with Object So could this be a bug? My question 2 - Transform vs drag node Ok, I can see that it’s reasonable to take the view that Transform change object size, and drag node does not, it’s more a matter of making minor changes than changing scale. My question 3 - Choice of Cap: I’m not sure what you mean by “other default brushes”. I understand that Round and Square Caps might get deformed. What I was trying to point out is that the body of the stroke deforms severely in response to a change of Cap. Furthermore, the deformation happens on the curves that are straight, but not on the ones that are curved - where you’d expect some deformation on the repeating section of the stroke. I have no complaint about the cap itself, but feel I must point out that it’s very strange that Designer does a very good job handling different caps on the bent curves. Is there a logical explanation for this? My question 4 - Number of Repeats: Any ideas? Regards
  2. @Callum Thanks. I hope you have everything you need, but if not let me know. Regards
  3. Dear Serif, would you please take a look at this and report back on which behaviors are bugs, and which are blunders, please? Regards
  4. @firstdefence Thanks for taking the time to provide that feedback - I’m reassured by the fact that you were able to reproduce some of the behavior I encountered. I’m not sure I’ve completely absorbed it, and I’ll probably think of more questions as time goes by. Regards
  5. I’m having difficulty making custom vector brushes that behave the way I expect. I failed more often than I succeeded, so I decided to take a close look at this kind of brush. Looking back, I’ve learned some useful things, got some surprises, and found things that appear to be broken and need some attention from Serif/Affinity. I started by scouring the Help and the forums. I found several informative threads about making vector brushes, especially this one started by @AnnieW I learned a lot from this exercise and I hope this information will help others. I also found repeatable unexpected behavior that I don’t understand, so I’m hoping someone can help, please. After reading AnnieW’s epic thread, I made some brushes and started to examine their behavior closely. To keep things simple, I decided to start with just one kind of brush, Textured Intensity Brushes that produce repeating patterns. The Brushes I made 3 Textured Intensity brushes based on the same graphic at different sizes (128px, 256px and 512px). Brush Editor details are: 3X 128px Brush: Nozzle: Combined 3 copies of the 128px source image. Width 128px, Head offset 128px, Tail offset 256px, Body set to REPEAT 3X 256px Brush: Nozzle: Combined 3 copies of the 256px source image. Width 256px, Head offset 256px, Tail offset 512px, Body set to REPEAT 1X 512px Brush: Nozzle: 1 copy of the 512px source image. Width 512px, Head offset 0px, Tail offset 512px, Body set to REPEAT - so this brush essentially has neither Head nor Tail. Test File This is all in one file with 4 Artboards. There is one dartboard for each of the 3 brushes described above, and a fourth for some other brush. The Artboards are named for the subject brush. I also exported the brushes, and attached them in a .AFBrush file. Each Artboard contains The exported nozzle .PNG image (only for the 3 brushes described above), and Several curves with the brush applied, with Stroke Width set to the Width of the brush, except for Artboard 4. All of the curves are “simple” with just two nodes, no complex curve geometry. All curves have Scale with Object ON. a set of straight curves in lengths that are multiples of the brush width - hoping these would show the simplest brush behavior (no need to deform to the curve, simple numbers of repeats) a set of gently twisted curves of different lengths to examine how the brush deforms to follow the curve. The uploaded file represents the initial state for each of these tests. I can reproduce these behaviors at will. You can explore in any order, just be sure to start from the initial state (re-load the file or flush the history). Behavior on iPad and MacBook is the same unless otherwise noted. Artboards 1, 2 and 3 Behavior on the “Straight” curves - In Order (2 and 3 have Scale with Object ON) Scale with Object: Varying this setting changes the appearance of the brush stroke - but sometimes in surprising ways. This is with the file in its initial state, no edits required to trigger the behavior described. iPad: turning this setting OFF deforms the stroke, with severe horizontal compression at what appears to be the correct stroke width. Enabling it produces a result that looks good to me. MacBook: Same as iPad, but the degree of deformation clearly varies with the length of the curve. Choice of Brush: The way the 1X 512px brush changes differs from the way the other two brushes change (idifferent nozzle structure). Scale with Object ON appears to insert fewer repeats than the short curves can accommodate. Scale with Object OFF is better but also fails for the shortest curve I’m surprised Scale with Object has any effect in these circumstances as we’re not changing the size of the object. Surely it needs a “before” size and an “after“ size to figure out how to adjust the stroke width? This behavior persists even if you re-apply the brush to the curve. I checked, and I can’t reproduce this behavior on a new curve in a new document with the same brushes, no matter the value of Scale with Object at the time the curve is created. I’m going to inspect that more closely later. Cap: Varying the choice of Cap for the stroke also makes a difference. Both Round and Square Caps essentially destroy this particular brush stroke - repeatably. Butt Cap is the only option that preserves the appearance of the brush. I’ve experimented with Cap many times on other brushes, this is the only time I’ve seen it destroy a stroke, so I’m rather surprised. What’s up - is there a BUG somewhere? Length of Curve: Varying the length of the curves seems to be an adventure in its own right If you extend a curve by dragging an end node, the appearance of the stroke changes slightly. If you observe closely, you can see the repeats get stretched/compressed as you drag an end node until an apparent threshold at which point another repeat gets added and all the repeats resize accordingly. Very good. Except for the fact that Scale with Object is ON - see next para. If you extend a curve by dragging an end node, and then use Transform to shorten it, the appearance of the stroke changes dramatically. By selecting the Node tool you can see that Transform adjusted stroke Width (seems to be expected with Scale with Object set ON) . If you extend one of the curves using Transform the Stroke Width gets bigger (I anchored the left end, extended to the right, but this does not seem to matter). Well, since we have Scale with Object ON, that’s probably what should happen. But it appears this does not happen when you lengthen the curve by dragging the right-end node. Why does it matter how you change the length of a curve/size of an object? Seems Transform has it correct, dragging a node is not so smart, Stroke Width: Varying stroke width to values smaller than the defined width of the brush generally seems to improve the appearance of the result - it looks more like the brush nozzle image. The bounded range of the Stroke Width slider limits testing, so it is hard to see what happens at Widths above 100px. Behaviour on the “Bent” curves (2 and 3 have Scale with Object ON) I’m aware that AD has to deform a brush stroke to adapt to bent curves, but I’d like to have a better understanding of how that affects the final appearance of the stroke and what, if anything, I can do to reduce the deformation. I guess some brushes are not going to work well on acute bends. Scale with Object: ON consistently produces a better result than OFF for all brushes. Is this really correct? Cap: Butt Cap is consistently better than Round or Square. Round and Square Caps both tend to fragment the nozzle image at the ends of the curve. Fewer repeats (Body) lead to more fragmentation. Length of Curve: For variation in length I relied on multiple copies of a source curve, Transformed to different sizes preserving shape and aspect ratio. Stroke width was set to the height of the nozzle .PNG. Scaling the Bent curves with Transform seems to behave correctly; Stroke Width scales up and down with object size. I'm not sure how to compare dragging a node versus Transform for these curves. Stroke Width: Varying stroke width to values smaller than the defined width of the brush generally seems to improve the appearance of the result - it looks more like the brush nozzle image. The bounded range of the Stroke Width slider limits testing, so its hard to see what happens at Widths above 100px Artboard 4 Someone I know told me that the best bugs are at the keyboard, so I decided to experiment with someone else’s brushes. I played with some of AnnieW’s brushes (see threads 106307 and 106308 in this forum) using the same structure as above. I used @AnnieW;s Zigzag Stacked 5 brush with the Stroke Width set to 200px to go with a set of straight curves measuring 500px, 1000px, 2000px and 4000px (set to these lengths using Transform). Scale with Object: ON consistently produces a better result than OFF which mangles the nozzle image, especially for the shorter curves. Cap: Straight Curves: Butt Cap is the only choice that produces a good result. Round and Square Caps both essentially destroy the stroke (Sorry, AnnieW). Bent Curves: Round and Square caps improved, Butt Cap is still the best. Stroke Width: I varied Stroke Width to see if that affects Cap. In my opinion, Width of 200px produces better results than 80px, even though that is the native size of the brush. Length of Curve Straight Curves: Behavior is the same as for the 128px brush. Changing curve length by dragging a node does not change the stroke width to adapt, but if you use Transform to change curve lengths, stroke Width does adapt. Bent Curves: With Transform the Stroke Width changes with increasing/decreasing Object size. Stroke Width: Varying stroke width to values smaller than the defined width of the brush generally seems to improve the appearance of the result - it looks more like the brush nozzle image. The bounded range of the Stroke Width slider limits testing, so its hard to see what happens at Widths above 100px. Conclusion So, I learned some things and got a few surprises. I think the questions that need answers are Why does Scale with Object have any effect under these initial conditions? I didn't trigger it by changing the size/length of the curves. Why does it matter how you change the length of a curve/Object size? (Transform vs drag node) Why do Round and Square Caps destroy these brush strokes? The shorted straight curve in Artboard 3 is long enough to fit 2 repeats, but you only get 1. Why? Thanks in advance I'm running the most current versions of AD on MacBook (Catalina) and iPad (latest) Textured Intensity Brushes - Tests 01 Other Brushes No History.afdesign Textured Intensity - Aspect Ratio Test.afbrushes
  6. HI, I found this whilst looking for something else.... @AnnieW, thanks, this was illuminating. I tried your strategy of using 3 copies of the source and setting the Head and Tail Offsets accordingly. That made a dramatic difference for a brush that has been torturing me. But there seems to be another factor at play here (might just be my weird brush). I've attached a file with the brush source, and two test strokes. With Align set to centre the stroke on the underlying vector curve, the stroke is visible with no distortion my eyes can see (Screenshot Screen Shot 2020-06-29 at 3.17.25 PM). However, both of the other settings for Align are problematic (Screenshots Screen Shot 2020-06-29 at 3.30.55 PM and Screen Shot 2020-06-29 at 3.31.09 PM). Aligning to the inside of the circle makes the stroke invisible, aligning to the outside distorts the source quite badly (I know it has to get bent, but the result appears mangled in an inexplicable way). I get the same results on iPad and MacBook; both devices are running the most current OS (Catalina 10.15.5, iPadOS 13.5.1) and Affinity Designer 1.8.3 @Sean P, please let me know if you need more information. Regards Serrated Edges.afdesign
  7. @G13RL Thanks for the detailed explanation, much appreciated. Regards
  8. @G13RL: Hi, your example is an effect I would like to use too. I can reproduce the effect on the right using layer effects, but the one I'd really like to use is the one on the left. Can you explain how you accomplished that, please? Hope you don't mind me showing up this late.... Regards and Thanks in advance
  9. @Paul Mudditt Thanks - using the option key does it! Appreciate your response very much, thank you. I was aware this was posted to the iPod forum, but because of how I came to be aware of the question I did not know if I should be posting somewhere else. Stay well!
  10. Dear Affinity, please can you respond? Regards
  11. I just did a little test. The difference in behaviour also happens with closed curves and shapes. See the attached screenshot. I understand that differences between Mac OS and iPadOS may dictate some difference in application behaviour, but it’s hard to believe this falls into that category. Regards
  12. This question is about a difference between MacBook and iPad versions of Affinity Designer, most current version in both cases, so I hope this forum is an appropriate venue. On the iPad, I can make the weight of a stroke different at the ends of an open curve using the Stroke Studio. However, that does not work on my MacBook; dragging either endpoint of the weight/pressure curve downward to decrease the weight of the stroke moves the opposing endpoint at the same time. Which behaviour is the intended one (I am assuming they’re supposed to be the same)? Is there an option that affects this behaviour? I’ve attached a screenshot from the iPad showing an open curve (a straight line) made with the Pen tool, with a stroke that has different weights at the ends. Can I do this on my MBP? What do I need to do to achieve that? Regards
  13. Paul, thanks for the information. It may well be an iPadOS/iOS limitation, and I was not aware of the technique you describe, very useful as usual. Thanks again.
  14. Thanks. I really hope the difference between the iPad and desktop apps goes away soon. Regards
  15. I’m probably missing something, but I can’t find a way to transfer a document that is open in Designer on iPad into Photo for further editing. I can do this on the MacBook, but can’t find the corresponding menu items on the iPad. Can anyone point me in the right direction, please? I tried searching the forum, but did not find an answer.... Regards
  • Create New...

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.