Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Minimumsix13

  • Birthday November 9

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Knoxville, TN
  1. Well I think what we've gathered so far is that no one has a file format solution. Including Adobe—I'll give Affinity some props on cross-app file compatibility. The bottom line is that Adobe is an industry standard, but by no fault or action of their own other than getting in early. (this is the part where you chime in and tell me that's not the case because of other deprecated pieces of design software that no one cares about that have been around since the 80's. Affinity hit the scene well after Adobe was an established company and has caused quite a stir...that's not for nothing, so I say it's apples and oranges) Replace Adobe with Affinity in 1985 and things would look different. Affinity has proven themselves just as capable (or more so) of producing top-notch design software. Adobe just has several decades on them and that's all their is to it. Give Affinity 30 years of dev time and accrued revenue and we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. Right now, it's like comparing the abilities of an 18 year old and a gifted 5 year old. As gifted and as accelerated as that 5 year old might be, the 18 year old has, at the very least, an additional 13 years worth of experience and relational equity with those that surround them. And Affinity is gifted, take a look at the work some artists have made at Affinity Spotlight; you don't make stuff like some of this with crap software. For all the people that whine and moan that Affinity can't do "this or that" thing—you're right, it can't. But that hasn't stopped others from producing some really great work. Some jerk is going to argue with me that I'm "wrong" even though I'm not wrong, I'm just stating facts. So go ahead... I have to use Adobe files for my work, but I do hop in and out of Affinity because it really is a better experience. There are some things I can't do with Affinity apps, but they'll get there. Performance alone is head and shoulders above Adobe—and it's because Affinity apps were built from scratch. I've been harping in Adobe forums for years for someone over there to just make the call to start on a fresh release of core apps like Photoshop and Illustrator. It might take some years but GOD I know they would be better for it. AI and PS are like a fat man squeezed into a corset.
  2. Ah, good point! But the iPads RAM also helps to handle dedicated graphics processing with Apple's Metal engine, which is something Affinity relies on for smooth performance on a mobile device. And the processor is, of course a big factor. You don't sell a tablet for $150 if it's made with in-house silicon built for your operating system. Can't stress enough—the app is nearly identical to its desktop app so I'm not sure how well a Fire tablet would handle it. Refresh rate is a tough factor, too. Don't want to rain on your parade, honest. But it sounds like you would really benefit from dropping the cash on an iPad Pro, even the 10.5". My brother has a Fire 10, and it's nice, but it's a pretty big step down.
  3. Keeping the need alive Yeah I'll add that Affinity has made it stupid simple to switch between apps. There's always the "edit in" command in the file menu that lets you instantly switch your doc between Designer and Photo. I imagine the same will be true for Publisher. Adobe has always worked with links, which can be great for huge files with tons of content. Layout with InDesign, click to edit photos or vectors in Illustrator/PS, everything updates live in InDesign. But I much prefer Affinity's spin on things—core options are available in both apps and if you need to get intensive then just switch apps altogether. And the common file format is like a dream. It's really just a shift from an established way of doing things to a more streamlined one. Why build apps on different frameworks (Adobe) when you can build them all on the same one (Affinity) with dedicated feature sets?
  4. You and I value the same things. Shape builder + offset path all day err day.
  5. I checked the specs on the Fire 10; I'm afraid that it having only 2GB of RAM alone might disqualify it. I could totally be wrong, though. And what @davemac2015 said—Affinity is a small team with a pretty specific focus. Not sure I'd hold my breath on that one I'm also not sure I would want to use Designer on a not-iPad.
  6. It would be nice if a discrete tool tip would pop up to indicate what gesture I'm about to invoke with a given tool. Different numbers of fingers do different things with different tools and, honestly, it's usually a matter of trial and error for me to keep them all straight. Example: a three-finger hold with the Select Tool active brings up a tiny, transparent box that floats next to my fingers saying "drag to duplicate" or something. Much like that thin status bar at the bottom of the desktop app tells you which modifier keys do what. I like the idea of it floating next to the fingers performing the gesture, though. I'll always know where to look and it won't take up any more screen real estate.
  7. I also find it useful. But I also know that it's a learned behavior. So either people can just get used to it and everything will be okay (like any pro design app), or they can implement a left-swipe-delete and current users can easily re-learn something that's system-wide while also appealing to the natural behaviors of new Designer users. Could go either way, doesn't bother me, but I would lean towards implementing the left-swipe-delete.
  8. Yeah I'll third this. And this is anecdotal but I've seen this issue noted in plenty of other threads, too. Unless you're really zoomed in it can be infuriating to either choose the correct node or to not accidentally grab a handle. I know the Pencil isn't as precise as a mouse pointer, but it's precise enough to distinguish nodes and handles from a comfortable zoom position. Threshold just needs to be turned down a little.
  9. Totally not trying to be a jerk about this, and you bring up the excellent point of working on screen vs. print, but it doesn't matter what your UI looks like. Any time you go from a backlit screen to cast lighting on a piece of paper there's going to be a difference. No one blames a dark UI for the screen to print translation, that variable is just part of the job. Preflight, preflight, preflight; use a color book, get proofs, work in the right color space, etc. But if a light UI is just your preference then that's totally cool, no need to justify what you like, right? Yeah I design interfaces, too, a lot of us on here do. But I can't think of an audience more critical of UI design than designers who design UIs criticizing the UI of the app they design their UIs in. Get my point? An app like PS or even an Affinity product have a lot of bits and pieces that get crammed onto a single screen. And a lot of those modify the behaviors of other things which can affect workflow. All I'm saying is that when a new app comes around and tries to do better than its predecessors with over 20 years in the industry (and succeeds in many, many ways)...yeah, #respect.
  10. So I'm legitimately curious as to why you don't like a dark interface. And while I agree that the design software landscape could use some streamlining (always, always), I'm also curious as to what constitutes as eye candy. I mean don't get me wrong, I think there's always room for improvement, but when I was in school we actually had to design an alternative Photoshop concept. Dude—it's hard. There's just a lot to consider design-wise without even diving into the development side of things. So I guess I wax sympathetic to the devs when people criticize Adobe and Affinity because of that. Give it a shot sometime, it's fun but not for the faint-of-heart.
  11. I think you're looking for a Lightroom alternative rather than a Photoshop alternative, which is more in line with what I've always seen Affinity market Photo as. But...there really isn't a great LR alternative. I'm sure tons would disagree but out of the (literal) 30+ photographers I know, they all use LR. I've seen elsewhere Affinity has talked about adding a sort of DAM functionality to Photo but I'm not where that stands, if it stands.
  12. The simple media browser is a nice touch but I'm beyond excited about the prospect of a dedicated DAM. Aside from the bloated and unattractive Adobe Bridge there's literally NO MARKET for third-party file managers geared towards designers. The closest I've come is Pixa, which I would recommend taking a look at for reference if you guys aren't familiar. Lingo is another (good) DAM worth noting but it feels incredibly redundant unless you're working on a giant team with a load of assets. Even then, it feels limited compared to a fleshed out file browser. Asset management doesn't feel like a huge conversation piece on the Affinity forum. I don't know what you guys have planned, but something that is sorely missing from the software world for designers is a DAM that acts as a workspace for designers. I'm waiting for something that I can create projects within and collect colors, font choices, inspiration, document iterations, quick export from vector to raster formats, tagging, etc.
  13. Meh. I could be alone on this one but a lot of people seem to just appreciate as dark a UI as possible in an effort to let the interface fade into the background and visually make the work the focus. It's also a lot easier on the eyes. Also, having a colored interface can cause perceptual issues with color. I forget the term, but as an example: putting something red next to something green will make the red appear to be a different chroma than if it were next to something, say, blue. Better to use neutral colors for the interface in order to keep all colors in the work appearing as accurate as possible.
  14. Great points, all of them, and you're quite right—Affinity is performing and will continue to perform remarkably well in this sector. I think the outcry regarding published information about AP is due to the fact that all published information is either incorrect or out of date, not simply bits and bytes. Better on Affinity's part to have said nothing at all considering how long it's been since the first whisper of AP was uttered online. But they're young and ambitious and excited, I'm sure, so I can understand their enthusiasm behind announcing the addition of another app to their suite, thus bringing them ever closer to competing with Adobe on a grander scale. I don't think it hinders their "reputation", necessarily, but many (including me) have put Affinity on a pedestal for creating Adobe alternatives that really sing—this is just a reminder that Affinity is a small team of mere mortals who charge next to nothing to crank out legitimately pro-level design software.
  15. Indeed, working with big vector pieces can mean mapping out tons of raw geometry, hitting select all, and then using the shape builder tool to merge, subtract, and trim at will without having to think about what is and isn't selected when working with standard boolean operations. It's actually a bigger deal than most people give it credit for and I'm quite surprised Affinity isn't jumping at the chance to put their own spin on something that lies at the heart of vector and object-based design: improving the user experience of working with shapes and operations.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.