X-Raym

There are no batch processing options in APub but its Photo Persona (available if you also have Affinity Photo installed) does support macros (has a Library & a Macro panel).

Now that we have the ability to transform each object in a selection independently, I would like the ability to do so by a random amount.
Example: select all instances of a screw head in my illustration and rotate by a random number of degrees between 0 and 360.
Function would be something like…
rnd(min value, max value)

Please implement a full screen preview.
 
Thank you.

I often need to work with documents that have an unhealthy amount of layers.
A fast way to search a certain layer by it's name would really help.
Now I need to review the complete layer list over and over again, sometimes missing the layer, starting over etc...
This is actually the only feature I miss from Photoshop.
 
I know there is a feature where you can click objects and have the layer selected, but that does not help me because most layers I need to find are not visible.

Look a real time demo of this feature in Blender (note, because it is a 3D software, it use Gizmos handles instead of regular scale/transform tool, but you see how a simple checkbox can do the trick):

Look a real time demo of this feature in Blender (note, because it is a 3D software, it use Gizmos handles instead of regular scale/transform tool, but you see how a simple checkbox can do the trick):

For those who are curious about what this does, here is a before after:
 
Before

 
 
After

 
 
It should be on by default IMHO (if it is not already) to avoid surprise and searching. Users can still tweak performance on their own if they have problems.
 
Glad to have found a solution, anyway

@dominik
Hi, thanks for the suggestion !
This makes me think that the best way to integrate this feature would be indeed to have it has a Transform Tool toolbar button mode switch. This way it will work with mouse, but also with values entered right in the Transform panel.

I noticed that in your second post in that topic you listed 4 "keys to a good API," among them a standard scripting language & extensive documentation. Somewhere in one of the older topics, there is a discussion about which language that should be, but there was never any consensus about that.
In an earlier reply in the one you posted to @TonyB wrote that they had not "yet" written an API & that it "would take a while," but promised that they will have "some kind of extensibility" in the future.
You also listed "Lots of privilege" as a key. Depending on how it is implemented, that one could be a little tricky to implement as long as Serif is selling the apps in the Mac App Store because of Apple's ever stricter sandboxing requirements for apps purchased from the MAS.
So all things considered, we should be getting some unspecified kind of extensibility eventually, but we will have to wait & see when that will be & what it will enable.

We don't currently have an API because we haven't written it yet. We have lot to do so it will take a while but we will have some kind of extensibility in the future.

Hello @X-Raym,
this is an interesting suggestion.
While what I want to add is a mere improvement of your workaround and not a solution it still speeds up the process in some cases.
Transform the selected items by a percentage value in the transform panel (e.g. type 'w100px*0,8'). This shrinks the group of selected objects to a width of 80%. On the context toolbar of the Move Tool click on 'Transform Objects Individually'. Type into the width field the current value plus '*1/0,8'. This transforms all selected objects back to there original width. This saves you to do this individually to all objects. This of course only works if you know the factor of transformation. It won't work with an visual adjustment only. In this context your suggestion remains valid.
Cheers,
d.

Others posted 4 or 5 years ago, so you are in good company. - But I think it's another one of those themes, which are part of the version controls .ignore file list. 😉

As I mentioned in my second post in this discussion, from time to time we have heard from them. AFAIK, nothing has changed that would indicate that support for a scripting language is something we should expect any time soon, regardless of how useful it would be or how much we would love to see that.
Their comments are similar to those I have seen from the developers of other software when asked about why their products don't support scripting. They all say variations of the same thing: that because their apps were not designed to support scripting from the beginning, it would not be practical to add that later without rewriting much of their code.
We know that there has already been at least one major rewrite of the Affinity core code -- the devs said they had to do that just to be able to support some of the features added to one of the older updates, & that it took something like six months to get it to the point they could begin to add those features. It would be great if they have already started rewriting 1.8 or the promised 1.9 versions to support scripting but considering everything else they need to be doing (if nothing else to eliminate all the bugs we keep finding in 1.8) I think adding scripting support is still a low priority for them.

The term object and how used by several people in this thread can have different meanings and depends on the context they used that term. - From a programmers and OO programming language point of view here (that context) an object is clearly defined then as an at runtime created/build instance of a class definition. In OO one usually talks about classes which describe and define the attributes (fields) and behavior (methods) of objects etc.
Since the Affinity Apps are written mainly in C++ they will have internally some OO oriented class structures, as for example abstract class Shape and then concrete classes rect, circle, triangle ... which do inherit the base attributes and methods from a shape (attributes/methods the all share) but can overwrite or extend the inherited capabilities of a plain shape dependent on what attribute/methods etc. those will additionally need.
For scripting you would need to have definitions for the most common needed things, similar to what menu entries, keyboard shortcuts etc. do initiate and are mapped to. You would need to be able to define/create or access/modify a document, it's canvas (the drawing area), layers, the graphics primitives ... etc. - Script compilation depends on the choosen language here, ideal would be some interpreter like language which supports both, an interactive mode and for performance reasons (for possible huge scripts) then some faster turn-around precompilation.
Do you have to care about that? You are an end user (customer) and not a member of the dev team, so why do you always worry about those things? - In the IT-domain I work our software customers don't care about that, that's not their problem, they have some demands and do need several features and functionality and it is our part (the software edevs) to implement what the customers do need here. Ideally then in a way both sides are happy with, so to say in a gracefull working bugfree manner.

I think so (given the discussion etc. in this thread), but the developers might have way more questions than me.

@GarryP I just rename the thread to something more explicit "Q: Compress or Expand selected objects positions ?".

Just my two cents on this : yes having a search replace color or even just a simple minimal search select with a popup to enter code value would be very welcome !
 

You don't need the full code, but a comprehension of the object model if there's one and of the methods/functions you can use with the script language with their parameters to help you, for examples:
http://jongware.mit.edu/idcs6js/
https://www.indesignjs.de/extendscriptAPI/indesign-latest/#about.html

??? 

@R C-R I don't understand their answer at that time then, SDK doesn't have reveal any code, it is not like open sourcing, it is just bringing some functions to users but without access under the hood. It d'oesn't even have to be object oriented.
Sure it is surely way more complex than we can imagine. But also... not impossible... and deeply wanted by users

Oh, actually, I think you can do something which might be near to what you might want to do.
Group the objects, then select all the objects in the Group and open the Constraints Panel.
In the Constraints Panel click on the left-right and up-down arrows.
Then select the group and resize it.
See attached video.
2020-05-08 13-24-43.mp4

@Alfred
Actually the math involved would be quite simple : change anchoir point positions (like with scaling) and set shape position to these new anchor points positions.
It is really like the scale selection feature but preserving object size. Extra basic.

Yes, combined with the usual elements of a scripting language (data types, operators, objects, if-else-loop statements ... etc.)  one could write then own custom functions for certain image/drawing generating and handling aspects.

please add the shortcut for renaming layers

Someone please tell me this is already a thing?