rawalanche

Yes, I already noticed it's due to the non integer transform positions, but this is still a bit ridiculous. This is not anything I as a user should ever get in contact with:
- If makes 0 sense for rendering filter (nearest neighbor/bilinear) to actually be baked into the exported image. It should only be used for viewport.
- There should be some global option to simply disallow subpixel transforms, and round up all floats in transform panel to integers. If I am working with bitmap images, then the smallest discrete increment is a pixel.
I as a user should never be making a choice between less buggy and high quality interpolation, as nearest neighbor will produce aliasing under many conditions. I should just be able to use bilinear but not have to worry about constantly manually rounding float decimals in the transform panel.

I know this is by "design" but why is Serif so keen on using this non integer pixels anyway?
I think that users are more comfortable with losing half a pixel here or there and not having to deal with blurry outcome.
It also makes development a lot easier for a future tracing feature and have grids and guides act better in all 3 the programs.
And can lose some overhead for the calculating factors for vectors as it doesn't need to recalculate every non integer pixel position but move by whole pixels instead.

Yes, but I got frustrated because that conversation has already been had. 
 
^
Yesterday already I asked if there's better way than to manually correct transform after every snapped move or after every canvas resize, and a day later I get a suggestion that I should manually correct the transforms. So you can imagine the frustration.

Yes, I already noticed it's due to the non integer transform positions, but this is still a bit ridiculous. This is not anything I as a user should ever get in contact with:
- If makes 0 sense for rendering filter (nearest neighbor/bilinear) to actually be baked into the exported image. It should only be used for viewport.
- There should be some global option to simply disallow subpixel transforms, and round up all floats in transform panel to integers. If I am working with bitmap images, then the smallest discrete increment is a pixel.
I as a user should never be making a choice between less buggy and high quality interpolation, as nearest neighbor will produce aliasing under many conditions. I should just be able to use bilinear but not have to worry about constantly manually rounding float decimals in the transform panel.

Unfortunately no degree of mental gymnastics will make this any more predictable to use. Regardless if it's a bug or poor design, the result is the same - very poor usability.

Hi,
I know AP is a very cheap software, but I feel like there's almost seemingly a conscious effort to actually make it feel like a cheap software. Especially when it comes to UI defaults. It almost feels like whoever is in charge of the UI wants to let anyone looking for a Photoshop alternative very quickly know that "Hey, this is not Photoshop and it will never replace it."
I'd describe it as a "Kick in the nuts" first experience.
Why are there jarring things like mouse wheel scrolling vertically instead of zooming by default? Why do tools cycle by default and require settings flip to actually make them stop doing that.
When it comes to defaults, the rule of a thumb is that "If there's default that more than 50% of people change, it's the wrong default"
Why is the right panel layout so incredibly messy out of the box?
Why are the default keyboard shortcuts so poor and lacking?
Why do absolutely trivial things like adding a filter or picking a color always designed to take at least one or more two clicks? Why can't I just pick the color? Why do I have to pick the color and then click some intermediate color swatch to actually make that active color? 
I mean look at fill tool (Shift+F5).
In PS:
1. Hold down the alt key to pick foreground color
2. Select the area to be filled
2. Press fill hotkey, done.
 
In AP:
1. Select the area to be filled
2. Press hotkey to open the UI
4. Another key press to open the color selector, cause it doesn't use the active color swatch
5. Extremely clumsy click and drag operation on the color picker icon to start picking the color
6. Move the cursor to pick the color
7. Click the damn temporary color picker swatch to actually use the picked color (Seriously, WTF at this point?)
8. One more click outside of the color selector to dismiss it!
9. Finally, click apply. Done.
This is So. Incredibly. Slow!
 
Similar thing applies to the Adjustments panel for example. It's superior to adjustments button in the Layers panel, as it has nice icons that can guide you to the filter you are seeking much faster, but once you click it, you don't actually get the damn filter active. Instead, you get a list of presets, and even though in most cases there's just one, (Default), you still have to perform additional click to actually activate the filter. There is no option to disable the Adjustment layer preset UI so that they can actually be accessed with a single click.
There are traps like this scattered all over the AP. So this leaves me confused.
Serif is in an unique position to take over a big chunk of the market from Adobe, yet it seems like they are almost intentionally paying group of people to actively sabotage this advantage by consciously making the out of the box "first contact" experience with their software as bad as possible. 
There must be at least one person solely dedicated to figure out how to perform the simplest of tasks with as many clicks and UI interactions as possible. There's that guy who's job task is "This is $30 software, so you make damn sure it actually feels like that."
 

The fact that you seem to have access to surveys implies you are part of the Serif team, or at least cooperate with them on some capacity.
That, combined with the fact you are not ashamed to justify scroll wheel panning the picture vertically in an image editing software is just scary. It scares me to think that someone who has some influence or decisive right is not capable to understand that expected behavior is context dependent.
As someone above me already pointed out, for example in the first person shooter computer games, mouse wheel is usually used to switch weapons. Imagine the jarring situation, where you'd boot up the new PFS game you bought, just to notice that once you get into game, the scrollwheel would pan the player camera vertically, and you'd have to hold some hotkey along with it to actually scroll through the weapons.
This is what I like to call a "Blender" syndrome, although Blender dev team actually got their shit somewhat together since 2.8. Anyway, it's the syndrome of discouraging new users by doing something so basic and so common so wrong, that the user questions quality of the rest of the software. Basically: "If they got something so simple and so standardized so wrong, how can I expected them to get more advanced workflows right?"

Hi,
I know AP is a very cheap software, but I feel like there's almost seemingly a conscious effort to actually make it feel like a cheap software. Especially when it comes to UI defaults. It almost feels like whoever is in charge of the UI wants to let anyone looking for a Photoshop alternative very quickly know that "Hey, this is not Photoshop and it will never replace it."
I'd describe it as a "Kick in the nuts" first experience.
Why are there jarring things like mouse wheel scrolling vertically instead of zooming by default? Why do tools cycle by default and require settings flip to actually make them stop doing that.
When it comes to defaults, the rule of a thumb is that "If there's default that more than 50% of people change, it's the wrong default"
Why is the right panel layout so incredibly messy out of the box?
Why are the default keyboard shortcuts so poor and lacking?
Why do absolutely trivial things like adding a filter or picking a color always designed to take at least one or more two clicks? Why can't I just pick the color? Why do I have to pick the color and then click some intermediate color swatch to actually make that active color? 
I mean look at fill tool (Shift+F5).
In PS:
1. Hold down the alt key to pick foreground color
2. Select the area to be filled
2. Press fill hotkey, done.
 
In AP:
1. Select the area to be filled
2. Press hotkey to open the UI
4. Another key press to open the color selector, cause it doesn't use the active color swatch
5. Extremely clumsy click and drag operation on the color picker icon to start picking the color
6. Move the cursor to pick the color
7. Click the damn temporary color picker swatch to actually use the picked color (Seriously, WTF at this point?)
8. One more click outside of the color selector to dismiss it!
9. Finally, click apply. Done.
This is So. Incredibly. Slow!
 
Similar thing applies to the Adjustments panel for example. It's superior to adjustments button in the Layers panel, as it has nice icons that can guide you to the filter you are seeking much faster, but once you click it, you don't actually get the damn filter active. Instead, you get a list of presets, and even though in most cases there's just one, (Default), you still have to perform additional click to actually activate the filter. There is no option to disable the Adjustment layer preset UI so that they can actually be accessed with a single click.
There are traps like this scattered all over the AP. So this leaves me confused.
Serif is in an unique position to take over a big chunk of the market from Adobe, yet it seems like they are almost intentionally paying group of people to actively sabotage this advantage by consciously making the out of the box "first contact" experience with their software as bad as possible. 
There must be at least one person solely dedicated to figure out how to perform the simplest of tasks with as many clicks and UI interactions as possible. There's that guy who's job task is "This is $30 software, so you make damn sure it actually feels like that."
 

Hi,
I know AP is a very cheap software, but I feel like there's almost seemingly a conscious effort to actually make it feel like a cheap software. Especially when it comes to UI defaults. It almost feels like whoever is in charge of the UI wants to let anyone looking for a Photoshop alternative very quickly know that "Hey, this is not Photoshop and it will never replace it."
I'd describe it as a "Kick in the nuts" first experience.
Why are there jarring things like mouse wheel scrolling vertically instead of zooming by default? Why do tools cycle by default and require settings flip to actually make them stop doing that.
When it comes to defaults, the rule of a thumb is that "If there's default that more than 50% of people change, it's the wrong default"
Why is the right panel layout so incredibly messy out of the box?
Why are the default keyboard shortcuts so poor and lacking?
Why do absolutely trivial things like adding a filter or picking a color always designed to take at least one or more two clicks? Why can't I just pick the color? Why do I have to pick the color and then click some intermediate color swatch to actually make that active color? 
I mean look at fill tool (Shift+F5).
In PS:
1. Hold down the alt key to pick foreground color
2. Select the area to be filled
2. Press fill hotkey, done.
 
In AP:
1. Select the area to be filled
2. Press hotkey to open the UI
4. Another key press to open the color selector, cause it doesn't use the active color swatch
5. Extremely clumsy click and drag operation on the color picker icon to start picking the color
6. Move the cursor to pick the color
7. Click the damn temporary color picker swatch to actually use the picked color (Seriously, WTF at this point?)
8. One more click outside of the color selector to dismiss it!
9. Finally, click apply. Done.
This is So. Incredibly. Slow!
 
Similar thing applies to the Adjustments panel for example. It's superior to adjustments button in the Layers panel, as it has nice icons that can guide you to the filter you are seeking much faster, but once you click it, you don't actually get the damn filter active. Instead, you get a list of presets, and even though in most cases there's just one, (Default), you still have to perform additional click to actually activate the filter. There is no option to disable the Adjustment layer preset UI so that they can actually be accessed with a single click.
There are traps like this scattered all over the AP. So this leaves me confused.
Serif is in an unique position to take over a big chunk of the market from Adobe, yet it seems like they are almost intentionally paying group of people to actively sabotage this advantage by consciously making the out of the box "first contact" experience with their software as bad as possible. 
There must be at least one person solely dedicated to figure out how to perform the simplest of tasks with as many clicks and UI interactions as possible. There's that guy who's job task is "This is $30 software, so you make damn sure it actually feels like that."
 

Hi,
I know AP is a very cheap software, but I feel like there's almost seemingly a conscious effort to actually make it feel like a cheap software. Especially when it comes to UI defaults. It almost feels like whoever is in charge of the UI wants to let anyone looking for a Photoshop alternative very quickly know that "Hey, this is not Photoshop and it will never replace it."
I'd describe it as a "Kick in the nuts" first experience.
Why are there jarring things like mouse wheel scrolling vertically instead of zooming by default? Why do tools cycle by default and require settings flip to actually make them stop doing that.
When it comes to defaults, the rule of a thumb is that "If there's default that more than 50% of people change, it's the wrong default"
Why is the right panel layout so incredibly messy out of the box?
Why are the default keyboard shortcuts so poor and lacking?
Why do absolutely trivial things like adding a filter or picking a color always designed to take at least one or more two clicks? Why can't I just pick the color? Why do I have to pick the color and then click some intermediate color swatch to actually make that active color? 
I mean look at fill tool (Shift+F5).
In PS:
1. Hold down the alt key to pick foreground color
2. Select the area to be filled
2. Press fill hotkey, done.
 
In AP:
1. Select the area to be filled
2. Press hotkey to open the UI
4. Another key press to open the color selector, cause it doesn't use the active color swatch
5. Extremely clumsy click and drag operation on the color picker icon to start picking the color
6. Move the cursor to pick the color
7. Click the damn temporary color picker swatch to actually use the picked color (Seriously, WTF at this point?)
8. One more click outside of the color selector to dismiss it!
9. Finally, click apply. Done.
This is So. Incredibly. Slow!
 
Similar thing applies to the Adjustments panel for example. It's superior to adjustments button in the Layers panel, as it has nice icons that can guide you to the filter you are seeking much faster, but once you click it, you don't actually get the damn filter active. Instead, you get a list of presets, and even though in most cases there's just one, (Default), you still have to perform additional click to actually activate the filter. There is no option to disable the Adjustment layer preset UI so that they can actually be accessed with a single click.
There are traps like this scattered all over the AP. So this leaves me confused.
Serif is in an unique position to take over a big chunk of the market from Adobe, yet it seems like they are almost intentionally paying group of people to actively sabotage this advantage by consciously making the out of the box "first contact" experience with their software as bad as possible. 
There must be at least one person solely dedicated to figure out how to perform the simplest of tasks with as many clicks and UI interactions as possible. There's that guy who's job task is "This is $30 software, so you make damn sure it actually feels like that."
 

In both AD and APh:
With Pen selected make sure this button is selected in the context toolbar.
(As far as "ceasing to be visible:, I concur with @Alfred in the previous post)

Hello,
 
I've recently bought Affinity Photo to explore it as an alternative to a Photoshop, and while I am having fun, the first impression Affinity has made on me is that it's very laggy and unstable. What caused this poor initial impression is very unfortunate default behavior of smooth zoom tool, activated by ctrl+spacebar+mouse drag combo. Affinity seems to try to help out user by snapping zoom increments to values like 50%-100%-200% etc... but ultimately, this behavior feels like a lag, not a snap, sending constant signals to my brain that the entire application is lagging and I should check if there's nothing CPU/GPU expensive running in the background.
 
It seems I am not alone when it comes to being irritated by this behavior. Some other people, mostly professionals, seem to feel the same, for example: http://www.diyphotography.net/took-affinity-photo-windows-beta-ride-thoughts/
 
This poor design choice could be solved in one of the two ways:
 
1: Remove zoom snapping completely. The feature user expects to encounter when activating ctrl+spacebar zoom is a smooth zoom. Notice the word smooth. It implies smooth experience without any jerkiness, lagging or sharp snaps.
 
2: Add option to disable zoom snapping somewhere in the settings.
 
Thank you.

Thanks. Yes, it does... It took me a while to find it though.

You can activate the "Use Shift key to cycle tool group" in the Tools Preferences so that pressing the same key twice wont switches the tool, and still can assign different tool with the same key shortcut.
Hope that helps.

Hello,
 
I've recently bought Affinity Photo to explore it as an alternative to a Photoshop, and while I am having fun, the first impression Affinity has made on me is that it's very laggy and unstable. What caused this poor initial impression is very unfortunate default behavior of smooth zoom tool, activated by ctrl+spacebar+mouse drag combo. Affinity seems to try to help out user by snapping zoom increments to values like 50%-100%-200% etc... but ultimately, this behavior feels like a lag, not a snap, sending constant signals to my brain that the entire application is lagging and I should check if there's nothing CPU/GPU expensive running in the background.
 
It seems I am not alone when it comes to being irritated by this behavior. Some other people, mostly professionals, seem to feel the same, for example: http://www.diyphotography.net/took-affinity-photo-windows-beta-ride-thoughts/
 
This poor design choice could be solved in one of the two ways:
 
1: Remove zoom snapping completely. The feature user expects to encounter when activating ctrl+spacebar zoom is a smooth zoom. Notice the word smooth. It implies smooth experience without any jerkiness, lagging or sharp snaps.
 
2: Add option to disable zoom snapping somewhere in the settings.
 
Thank you.