BofG

You need to use snapping to the grid. Switch to the appropriate view (side/top/front) to make the grid change as appropriate for the plane the object is on.

Provide a bit more information Either the source file and the output or at least screen shots of you document colour settings and the export settings.

It's easy with Designer to create a project without paying any attention to the eventual pixel format. The display in Designer scales as you zoom and will always present a crisp view. If you intend to have a raster output you should be working in the pixel preview mode, you should have set force pixel alignment and move by whole pixels. Work to the intended lowest output pixel density. Depending on your definition of "blurry" some formats do export a little less sharp from Affinity than they would from other such applications. It's a really minimal difference though.

I don't know what vray does, but Windows Photo Viewer isn't colour managed, I think it uses the monitor's colour space rather than assuming sRGB. Affinity is fully colour managed and will also correctly use your monitor's profile.

I've not done specific app development, just web apps, but a quick Google seems to show that it's much the same - you serve a different pixel density image based on the device PPI. Your developer shouldn't be asking for one size, they should be asking for a range of sizes, each on suitable for a certain screen density. As for whether your logo will work, one way to see is to use the pixel preview/retina preview modes in Designer. You should really be working to a pixel grid (force pixel alignment). Your design being angled text will present a challenge as non right angles always "staircase" across the underlying pixels. If the size required is genuinely what you stated, then your logo design isn't suitable. It's just too much to fit in. Hope that helps!

Fixed that advice 😀 On a serious note though, it is genuinely a better way to go. Sadly Affinity has a history of print related bugs and the output from Adobe Reader is better anyway.

At 220px wide, and with your longest run of text taking ~80% of the width with 40 characters you've allowed ~4-5 pixels per character. You cannot get nice crisp characters with that small an amount. Whether it can work depends more on the final size in the app. Phones tend to have very high PPI screens, so physically small icons can look nice, but you still need the pixels there. Will the logo be genuinely displayed pixel-to-pixel at 220 x 170px or is your designer basing that off the "standard" 72ppi baseline? As mentioned above, if possible an svg would be best as it will take advantage of the pixel density of the display it's shown on.

Your only option would be to use an OS level automation to replicate those mouse moves/clicks. I've made something similar using AutoHotkey on Windows that opens the alignment panel, clicks "space vertically", enters the spacing amount and then clicks apply all from one keyboard press.

I think I was tripping myself up with the fact you can use those handles without first selecting the move tool, and they then act like the artboard tool is selected. Except the detactched handle which then acts like the move tool with lock children ticked, even if it was unticked on last use. Maybe some room for improvement here?

Today is a school day for me Why does that option work in reverse when there are text frames versus no text frames? Also, why does deleting the text frames not revert the behaviour to that of an artboard without them?

So I've been trying this and I'm at a loss. An artboard without text frames will happily resize all of the content. An artboard with text frames can either resize the text with it but not the images, or just resize the area of the artboard. Deleting the text frames from the artboard doesn't change the behaviour. It doesn't then act like an artboard without text frames. I'm sorry to say I have no idea how this is supposed to work, it seems like a mess to me. Hopefully someone else who uses text frames with artboards will come to your assistance. @Dan C or @MEB might be able to help?

I don't usually use text frames, and it seems they create a special case when resizing artboards. You need to use the move tool, with the artboard selected and then drag this extra "dot" handle: Typing into the transform panel doesn't work. Another wonderful quirk of the UI 😀

Hmm, can you post a screenshot of your layers panel?

Are you using the artboard tool? That will resize the artboard and not the contents. You need the move tool or type the values into the transform panel.

You can resize the entire artboard and it's content by selecting the artboard in the layers panel and either use the resize handles or type your desired size into the transform panel. I have to admit I'm not sure what resampling is done on any contained images, but they will scale accordingly.

Perhaps we should first introduce them to the concept of regression testing 😂

I discovered a really good way for this - take your "flat" drawing as a group and create a symbol from it. Now fit that symbol to the isometric plane. Every edit on the flat version is updated live on the isometric one and vice versa. If you need to change the isometric parts for e.g. adjusting relative positions of the shapes to account for depth, you can just pause the sync while you do so, then turn the sync back on after. That way your flat version doesn't get distorted.

This is in my opinion the best approach in any case. I gave up printing directly from Affinity a while ago, it saves lots of headaches.

If you print the pdf from Acrobat Reader do you get the print without the border? Edit - Okay I wasn't paying attention, that print on the left must be from the pdf. Generally speaking printing from Affinity isn't the best, there's been lots of issues and little bugs around since the start.

@Insane_Fox Maybe a 'recolour' adjustment layer could work for you: Accessed from the bottom of the layers panel (the cicular icon with the "Adjustments" tool tip). Side note - this won't export as a purely vector format, so it's only useful if you intend to export to a raster format.

When you say "clone" do you mean a copyright infringing copy of a font family?

Near the top left, just to the right of where is says "radial" there is a colour panel- click that and it will show your gradient. You need to change the colours there otherwise you are just setting a "flat" colour and so removing the gradient.

Whether the font is "at fault" or not, this is a bug - the whole point of the expand stroke function is to transform the stroke as you see it into a path. It's not intended to make a path with notches in to highlight substandard font construction (and only when the objects are below an arbitrary size).

Collaborate and listen? Or hammertime?

Even if there was just a way to remember the window state of a file, so opening it again wouldn't require the manual adjustment of the window.